■s^. 


^^^  ^^-  .0. 


IMAGE  EVALUATION 
TEST  TARGET  (MT-S) 


V 


// 


A 


A 


^r 


I/. 


^ 


& 
^ 


i.O 


I.I 


1.25 


|50     1""^ 


iiiii 


Wuu 


1.8 


U    111.6 


: 


^. 


V] 


<^ 


/^ 


C*"^/.  o>i, 


A 


•1 


^^ 


/S 


c/f 


Photographic 

Sciences 
Corporation 


23  WEST  MAIN  STREET 

WEBSTER,  NY.  14580 

(716)  872-4503 


<,1>^ 

i\"*"  A 


^. 


6^ 


^^. 


(4 


: 


CIHM/ICMH 
Microfiche 


CIHM/ICMH 
Collection  de 
microfiches. 


Canadian  Institute  for  Historicai  IVIicroreproductions  /  institut  Canadian  de  microreproductions  historlques 


Technical  and  Bibliographic  Noteo/Notas  techniques  et  bihliographiques 


Th« 
to  tl- 


The  institute  has  attempted  to  obtain  the  best 
original  copy  available  for  filming.  Features  of  this 
copy  which  may  be  bibliographically  unique, 
which  may  alter  any  of  the  images  in  the 
reproduction,  or  which  may  significantly  change 
the  usual  method  of  filming,  are  checked  below. 


D 


D 


D 
D 
D 
D 

D 


Coloured  covers/ 
Couvertura  de  couiaur 


I      I    Covxrs  damaged/ 


Couverture  endommag^e 


Covers  restored  and/or  laminated/ 
Couverture  restaur^  et/ou  poiliculAe 


r~~l    Cover  title  missing/ 


Le  titre  de  couverture  manque 


□    Coloured  maps/ 
Cartes  g^ographiques  en  couleur 


D 


Coloured  ink  (i.e.  other  than  blue  or  biack)/ 
Encre  de  couleur  (i.e.  a.^e  que  bloue  ou  noife) 


Coloured  plates  and/or  illustrations/ 
Planches  et/ou  illustrations  en  couleur 


Bound  with  other  material/ 
R&lii  avec  d'autres  documents 

Tight  binding  may  cause  shadows  or  distortion 
along  interior  margin/ 

La  re  liure  serr^e  paut  causer  de  I'ombre  ou  de  la 
distorsion  le  long  de  la  marg«  intdrieure 

Blank  leaves  added  during  restoration  may 
appear  within  the  text.  Whenever  possible,  these 
have  been  omitted  from  filming/ 
II  se  peut  que  certaines  pages  blanches  ajouties 
lors  d'une  restauration  apoaraissent  dans  le  taxte, 
mais,  lorsque  cela  6tait  possible,  ces  pages  n'ont 
pas  iti  filmdes. 

Additional  comments:/ 
Commentaires  supplimentaires; 


L'institut  a  microfilm^  le  meilleur  exemplaire 
qu'il  lui  a  M  possible  de  se  procurer.  Les  details 
de  cet  exemplaire  qui  sont  peut-4tre  uniques  du 
point  de  vue  bibliographique.  qui  peuvent  modifier 
une  image  reproduite,  ou  qui  peuvent  exiger  une 
modification  dans  la  mithode  normale  de  fllmage 
sont  indiquis  ci-dessous. 


□    Coloured  pages/ 
Pages  de  couleur 

□    Pajos  damaged/ 
Pages  endommagies 

p~|    Pages  restored  and/or  laminated/ 


D 


Pages  restaur^es  et/ou  pelliculies 

Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxe< 
Pages  ddcolories,  tacheties  ou  piqu^es 

Pages  detached/ 
Pages  ditachdes 

Showthroughy 
Transparence 

Quality  of  prir 

Quality  inAgale  de  I'impression 

Includes  supplementary  materii 
Comprend  du  matiriel  supplimentaire 

Only  edition  available/ 
Seuie  Edition  disponible 


The 
poss 
of  tt 
filmi 


Orig 
begi 
tCiel 
slon 
othe 
first 
slon 
or  ill 


I    ^  Pages  discoloured,  stained  or  foxed/ 

r~~]  Pages  detached/ 

FT]  Showthfough/ 

r~l  Quality  of  print  varies/ 

|~n  Includes  supplementary  material/ 

r~1  Only  edition  available/ 


The 
shall 
TINk 
whi( 

Map 
diffe 
entii 
begi 
right 
requ 
met! 


Pages  wholly  or  partially  obscured  by  errata 
slips,  tissues,  etc..  have  been  refilmed  to 
ensure  the  best  possible  image/ 
Les  pages  totaiement  ou  partieitement 
obscurcies  par  un  feuillet  d'arrata.  une  pelure, 
etc.,  cnt  iti  film^es  d  nouveau  de  facon  ^ 
obtenir  la  meilleure  image  possible. 


This  item  is  filmed  at  the  reduction  ratio  checked  below/ 

Ce  document  est  filmi  au  tau  <  de  reduction  indiquA  ci-dessous. 


10X 

14X 

18X 

22X 

26X 

30X 

1            ! 

i       i 

,    L.«„. 

12X 


16X 


20X 


24X 


28X 


32X 


Th9  copy  filmed  here  has  been  reproduced  thanks 
to  thr  generosity  of: 

Harold  Campb«ll  Vaughan  IVIemorial  Library 
Acadia  University 


L'exemplaire  filmA  f ut  reproduit  grAce  H  la 
g4n6rositA  de: 

Harold  Campbell  Vauf^an  Memorial  Library 
Acadia  University 


The  images  appearing  here  are  the  best  quality 
possible  considering  the  condition  and  legibility 
of  the  original  copy  and  in  keeping  with  the 
filming  contract  specifications. 


Les  image))  sulvantes  ont  6tA  reproduites  avec  le 
plus  grand  soin,  compte  tenu  de  la  condition  at 
de  ia  nettetd  de  l'exemplaire  film6,  at  en 
conformity  avec  les  conditions  du  contrat  de 
filmage. 


Original  copies  in  printed  paper  covers  are  filmed 
beginning  with  the  front  cover  and  ending  on 
tEie  last  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  impres- 
sion, or  the  back  cover  when  appropriate.  All 
other  original  copies  are  filmed  beginning  on  the 
first  page  with  a  printed  or  illustrated  Impres- 
sion, and  ending  on  the  last  page  with  a  printed 
or  illustrated  impression. 


The  last  recorded  frame  on  each  microfiche 
shall  contain  the  symbol  — »-  (meaning  "CON- 
TINUED"), or  the  symbol  V  (meaning  "END"), 
whichever  applies. 


Les  exemplaires  originaux  dont  la  couverture  en 
papier  est  imprimte  sont  filmte  en  commenqant 
par  le  premier  plat  at  en  terminant  soit  par  la 
dernlAre  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impressionjou  d'lllustration,  soit  par  le  second 
plat,  selon  le  cas.  Tous  les  autres  exemplaires 
originaux  sont  film^s  en  commenqant  par  la 
premiere  page  qui  comporte  une  empreinte 
d'impressian  ou  d'illustration  at  en  terminant  par 
la  dernidre  page  qui  comporte  une  telle 
empreinte. 

Un  des  symboles  suivants  appara^ura  sur  la 
d')rnidre  image  de  cheque  microfiche,  selon  le 
cas:  le  symbols  — ►  signifie  "A  SUIVRE",  le 
symbole  V  signifie  "FIN". 


Maps,  plates,  charts,  etc.,  may  be  filmed  at 
different  reduction  ratios.  Those  too  large  to  be 
entirely  included  in  one  exposure  are  filmed 
beginning  in  the  upper  left  hand  corner,  left  to 
right  and  top  to  bottom,  as  many  frames  as 
required.  The  following  diagrams  illustrate  the 
method: 


Les  cartes,  planches,  tableaux,  etc..  peuvent  Atre 
f ilm6s  it  des  taux  de  reduction  diff brents , 
Lorsque  le  document  est  trop  grand  pour  Atre 
reproduit  en  un  seul  clich6.  il  est  film6  A  partir 
de  I'angie  supArieur  gauche,  de  gauche  A  droite, 
et  de  haut  en  bas,  en  prenant  le  nombre 
d'images  nAcessaire.  Les  diagrammes  suivants 
lllustront  la  mAthode. 


1  2  3 


5 


6 


■^^vp 


MR.  WEBSTER'S  VINDICATIOlS 


i 


OF  THE 


TREATY  OP  WASHINGTON  OF  1842; 


IN  A  SPEECH 


DELIVERED  IN  THE  SENAfE  OP  TH      UNITED  STATES, 


« 


.V 


On  the  6tu  and  Tth  of  April,  1846. 


WASHINGTON: 

PRINTED   BY  J.  &  G.  S.  GIDEON. 

1S46. 


>V$x-t»^V     .^" " 


9 

« 


k 


^ 


[•^  *n-".     Y 


k 


THE  TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON. 


^-\ 


Mr.  WEBSTER  rose  and  said:  It  is  altogether  unexpected  to  me, 
Mr.  President,  to  find  it  to  be  my  duty,  here,  and  at  this  time,  to  de- 
fend the  treaty  of  Washington  of  1842,  and  the  correspondence  ac- 
companying the  negotiation  of  that  treaty.     It  is  a  past  transaction. 
Four  years  have  almost  elapsed  aince  the  treaty  received  the  sanction 
of  the  Senate,  and  became  the  law  of  the  land.     While  before  the 
Senate,  it  was  discussed  with  much  earnestness  and  very  great  ability. 
For  its  ratification,  it  received  the  votes  of  five-sixths  of  the  whole 
Senate— a  greater  majority,  1  believe  I  may  say,  than  was  ever  be- 
fore found  for  any  disputed  treaty.     From  that  day  to  this— although 
I  had  had  a  hand  in  the  negotiation  of  the  treaty,  and  feU  it  to 
be  a  transaction  with  which   my  own   reputation   was   intimately 
-connected,  I  have  been  willing  to  leave  it  to  the  judgment  of  the  na- 
tion.    There  were,  it  is  true,  sir,  some  things  of  which  I  have  not 
complained,  and  do  not  complain,  but  which,  nevertheless,  were 
subjecUs  of    regret.      The   papers   accomp^mying   the  treaty    were 
Tohnninous.     Their  publication  was  long  delayed,  wailing  for  the 
^exchange  of  ratifications;  and,  when  finally  published,  they  were  not 
■distributed  to  any  great  extent, or  in  large  numbers.  The  treaty ,  mean- 
time, got  before  the  public  surreptitiously,  and,  with  the  documents, 
came  out  by  piece-meal.     We  know  that  it  is  unhappily  true,  that 
away  from  the  large  commercial  cities  of  the  Atlantic  coast,  there  a'-e 
few  of  the  public  prints  of  the  country  which  publish  oflicial  papers 
on  such  an  occasion  at  large.     I  might  have  felt  a  natural  desire,  that 
tlie  treaty  and  the  correspondence  could  have  been  known  and  read  by 
every  one  ofmy  fellow-citizens, from  East  to  West, and  from  North  to 
•South.  But  it  was  impossible.     Nevertheless, in  returning^o  the  Sen- 
ate again ,  nothing  was  farther  from  my  purpose  than  to  renew  the 
•discussion  of  any  of  the  topics  discussed  and  fettled  at  that  lime;  and 


5  2  'A'/o 


<•« 


f  t 


4 

nothing  farther  from  my  expectation  than  to  be  called  uppn  by  any 
sense  of  duty  to  my  own  reputation,  and  to  truth,  to  make,  now, 
any  observations  upon  the  treaty,  or  the  correspondence. 

But  it  basso  happened  that, in  the  debate  on  the  Oregon  question ,  the 
treaty ,  and ,  I  believe ,  every  article  of  it ,  and  the  correspondence  accom- 
panying the  negotiation  of  that  treaty ,  and,  I  believe,  every  part  of  it, 
have  been  the  subjectof  disparaging, disapproving, sometimes  contume- 
lious remarks,  in  one  or  the  other  of  tlie  Houses  of  Congress.  Now, 
with  all  my  indisposition  to  revive  past  transactions  and  make  them 
the  subjects  of  debate  here,  and  satisfied,  and  indeed  highly  gratified 
with  the  approbation  so  very  generally  expressed  by  the  country,  at 
the  time  and  ever  since,  1  suppose  that  it  could  hardly  have  been  ex- 
pected, nevertheless, by  any  body,  that  I  should  sit  here  from  day  to  day, 
through  the  debate,  and  through  the  session,  hearing  statements,  en- 
tirely erroneous  as  to  matters  of  fact,  and  deductions  from  these  sup-^ 
posed  facts  quite  as  erroneous,  all  tending  to  produce  unfavorable  im- 
pressions respecting  the  treaty,  and  the  correspondence,  and  every 
body  who  had  a  hand  in  it — I  say,  it  could  hardly  hkve  been  expect- 
ed by  any  body  that  I  should  cit  here  and  hear  all  this, and  keep  my 
peace.  The  country  knows  that  I  am  here.  It  knows  what  I  have 
heard,  again  and  again,  from  day  to  day;  and  if  statements  of  fact, 
wholly  incorrect,  are  made  here,  in  my  hearing,  and  in  my  presence, 
without  reply  or  answer  from  me,  why,  shall  we  not  hear  in  all 
the  contests  of  party  and  elections  hereafter,  that  this  is  a  fact,  and  that 
is  a  fact,  because  it  has  bden  stated  where  and  when  an  answer  could 
be  given,  and  no  answer  was  given  ?  I*  is  my  purpose, therefore,  to 
give  an  answer  here,  and  now,  to  whatever  has  been  alleged  against 
the  treaty,  or  the  correspondence. 

Mr.  President,  in  the  negotiation  of  1842,  and  in  the  correspond- 
ence, I  acted  as  Secretary  of  State  under  the  direction,  of  course,  of 
the  President  of  the  United  States.  But,  sir,  in  matters  of  high  im- 
portance, I  shrink  not  from  the  responsibility  of  any  thing  I  have  ever 
done  under  any  man's  direction.  Wherever  my  name  stands  I  am 
ready  to  answer  it,  and  to  defend  that  with  which  it  is  connected.  I 
am  here  to-day  to  take  upon  myself — without  disrespecX  to  the  Chief 
Magistrate  finder  whose  direction  I  acted — and  for  the  purposes  of  this 
discussion,  the  whole  responsibility  of  every  thing  that  has  my  name 
connected  with  it, in  the  tfegotiation  and  correspondence,  gir,  the  treaty 


.<v^ 


^,    ^ 


!>«»»■  wte"    1 


of  Washington  was  not  entered  into  to  settle  any— or  altogether  for  the 
purpose  of  settling  any— new,  arising  questions.  The  n>atters  embraced 
in  that  treaty ,  and  in  the  correspondence  accompanying  it,  had  been  in- 
teresting subjects  in  our  foreign  relations  for  fifty  years— unsettled  for 
My  years— agitating  and  annoying  the  councils  of  the  country,  and 
threatning  to  disturb  its  peace  for  fifty  years.  And  my  first  duly ,  then ,  in 
entering  upon  such  remarks  as  I  think  the  occasion  calls  for  in  regard 
to  one  and  all  of  these  topics,  will  be,  to  treaty  the  subjects  in  the  first 
place,  historically— to  show  when  each  arose— what  ha?  been  its  pro- 
gress in  the  diplomatic  history  of  the  country;  and  especially  to  show 
in  what  posture  each  of  those  important  subjects  stood  at  the  time 
when  William  Henry  Harrison  acceded  to  the  ofifice  of  President  of 
the  United  States.  i;"his  is  my  purpose.  I  do  not  intend  to  enter 
upon  any  crimination  of  gentlemen  who  have  filled  important  situa- 
tions in  the  executive  government  in  the  earlier,  or  in  the  more  recent, 
history  of  ihe  country.  But  1  intend  to  show,  in  the  progress  of  this 
discussion,  the  actual  position  in  which  things  were  left  in  regard  to 
the  topics  embraced  by  the  treaty,  and  the  correspondence  attending 
the  negotiation  of  it,  when  the  executive  government  devolved  upon 
<General  Harrison, and  his  immediate  successor,  Mr.  Tyler. 

Now,  sir,  the  first  of  these  topics  is  the  question  of  the  Northeastern 
B(»undary  of  the  United  Slates.  The  general  history  of  that  question , 
from  the  peace  of  1783  to  this  time,  is  known  to  all  public  men,  of 
•course,  and  pretty  well  understood  by  the  great  muss  of  well  informed 
persons  throughout  the  country.     I  shall  state  it  briefly. 

In  the  Treaty  of  Peace  of  September,  1783,  the  northern  and 
eastern,  or,  perhaps,  more  properly  speaking,  the  northeastern  boun- 
<dary  of  the  United  Slates,  is  thus  described,  viz: 

"  From  the  nortliwest  angle  of.Nova  Scotia,  viz.,  that  angle  which  is  formed  by  a  line 
■drawn  due  iiorlli  from  the  source  of  the  St.  Croix  river  to  the  iiighlands;  along  the  said 
highland.s,  whicli  divide  those  rivers  that  empty  themselves  into  the  St.  Lawrence  from 
those  which  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean,  to  the  northwesternmosl  head  of  Connecticut 
Tiver;  thence,  along  the  middle  of  that  river  to  the  forty-fifth  degree  of  north  latitude  j 
from  thence,  by  a  line  due  west  on  said  latitude,  until  it  strikes  the  river  Iroquois  or 
•Cataraquy.  East,  by  a  line  to  be  drawn  along  the  middle  of  the  river  St.  Croix,  from 
its  mouth  in  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  to  its  source,  and  from  its  source  directly  north  to  the 
^aforesaid  highlands." 

Such  is  the  description  of  the  northeastern  boundary  of  the  United 
States,  according  to  the  Treaty  of  Peace  of  1783.     And  it  is  quite 


6 


remarkable  that  so  many  embarrassing  ((ucstions  should  have  arisen 
from  tluise  few  lines,  and  have  been  matters  of  controversy  for  more 
than  half  a  century. 

The  first  disputed  question  was,  ''Which,  of  the  several  rivers  run- 
ning into  the  Bay  of  Fundy,  is  the  St.  Croix,  mentioned  in  the  trea- 
ty." It  is  singular  that  this  should  be  matter  of  dispute,  but  so  it 
was.  Engl'uul  insisted  that  the  true  St.  Cioix  was  one  river;  the 
United  Stales  inbisted  it  was  another. 

The  second  controverted  question  was,  ''Where  is  the  northwest 
angle  of  Nova  Scotia  to  be  found?" 

The  third,  "  What  and  where  are  the  highlands,  along  which  the 
line  is  to  run,  from  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  to  the  north- 
westernmost  head  of  Connecticut  river?" 

The  fourth,  "Of  the  several  streams  which,  flowing  together,  make 
up  Connecticut  river,  which  is  that  stream,  which  ought  to  be  regard- 
ed as  its  norlhwesternmost  head?" 

^rhe  fifth  was,  ''Are  the  rivers  which  discharge  their  waters  into 
the  Bay  of  Fundy,  rivers  'which  fall  into  the  Atlantic  ocean,'  in  the 
sense  of  the  terms  used  in  the  treaty?" 

The  5ih  article  of  the  treaty  between  the  United  States  and  Great 
Britain,  of  the  19th  of  Noveniboj-,  1794,  after  reciting,  that  "doubts 
had  arisen  what  river  was  truly  intended  under  the  name  of  the  river 
St.  Croix,"  proceeded  to  provide  for  the  decision  of  that  question, by 
three  commissioners,  one  to  be  appointed  by  each  Government,  and 
these  two  to  choose  a  third;  or,  if  they  could  not  agree,  dien  each  to. 
make  his  nomination,  and  decide  the  choice  by  lot.  The  two  com- 
missioners agreed  on  a  third;  the  three  executed  the  duty  assigned 
them,  decided  what  river  was  the  true  St.  Croix,  traced  it  to  its 
source,  and  there  established  a  monument.  So  much,  then,  on  the 
eastern  line  was  setded;  and  all  the  other  questions  remained  wholly 
unsettled  down  to  the  year  1842. 

But  the  two  Governments  continued  to  pursue  the  important  and  ne- 
cessary purpose  of  adjusting  boundary  difficulties;  and  a  convention 
was  negotiated  in  London  by  Mr.  Rufus  King  and  Lord  Hawkesbury, 
and  signed  on  the  121  h  day  of  May  ,1803,  by  the  2nd  and  3d  articles  of 
which  it  was  agreed,  that  a  commission  should  be  appointed,  in  the 
same  manner  as  that  provided  for  under  the  treaty  of  1794,  to  wit: 
one  commissioner  to  be  appointed  by  England,  and  one  by  the  United 


-A 


Slates,  and  these  two  to  make  choice  of  n  third;  or,  if  (hey  could  n«i 
agte(;,cach  to  name  the  person  ho  proposed,  and  the  choice  to  ho 
decided  by  lot;  this  third  commissioner,  whether  appointed  by  choice 
or  by  lot,  would,  of  course,  be  umpire  or  ultimate  arbiter. 

Govemmenls,  at  that  day ,  in  disputcei  concerning  (erritorial  bounda- 
ries, did  not  set  out  each  with  the  declaration  that  the  whole  of  its 
own  claim  was  clear  and  indisputable:  whatever  was  seriously  dispu- 
ted they  regarded,  as  in  eouie  d»)gree,  at  least,  doubtful  or  disputable; 
and,  when  they  could  not  agree, ibey  saw  no  indignity  or  impropriety 
in  referring  the  dispute  to  arbitration,  even  though  the  arbitrator  were 
to  be  app<jinted  by  chance,  between  respectable  persons,  named, sev- 
verally,by  the  parlies. 

The  commission  thus  constituted  was  authorized  to  ^ascertain  and 
determine  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia;  to  run  and  mark  the 
line  from  the  monument,  at  the  source  of  St.  Croix,  to  that  north- 
west angle  of  Nova  Scotia;  and  also  to  determine  the  northwestern- 
most  head  of  Connt-ciicut  river;  and  then  to  run  and  mark  the  boun- 
dary line  between  the  northwest  angle  of  Nova  Scotia  and  the  said 
norlhwesternmost  head  of  (.'ormecticut  river;  and  the  decision  and 
proceedings  of  (he  said  connnissioners,  or  a  majority  of  (hem,  was 
to  be  final  and  conclusive. 

No  objection  was  made  by  either  Government  to  this  agreement 
and  stipulation;  but  an  incidet.t  arose  to  prevent  the  tinal  ratification 
of  this  treaty,  and  it  arose  in  this  way.  Its  fifth  article  contained  an  • 
agreement  between  the  parties  settling  the  line  of  l)oundary  between 
them  beyond  the  liake  of  the  Woods.  In  coming  to  this  agreement 
they  proceeded,  exclusively,  on  the  grounds  of  (heir  respective  rights 
under  the  treaty  of  1783;  but  it  so  happi-ned  that,  twelve  days  be- 
fore the  convention  was  signed  in  London ,  trance,  by  a  treaty  signed 
in  Paris,  had  ceded  liouisiana  to  the  United  Stales.  This  cession  was 
at  once  regarded  as  giving  to  the  United  States  new  rights,  or  new 
limits, in  this  part  of  the  continent.  The  Senate,  therefore,  struck 
this  5ih  article  out  of  the  convention;  and  as  England  did  not  incline 
to  agree  to  this  alteration,  the  whole  convention  fell. 

Here,  sir,  the  whole  matter  rested  till  it  wa^  revived  by  (he  Treaty 
of  Ghent,  in  the  year  1814.  And  by  the  5th  article  of  that  treaty  it 
was  provided,  that  each  party  should  appoitit  a  conunissioner,  aiid 
those  two  should  have  power  to  ascertain  and  determine  the  boundary 


« 


'Hn«^  from  the  floiircfl  of  the  St.  f'rolx  (o  (lie  St.  Lawrence  rtrer, 
aceording  to  the  Irenly  of  1783;  nrid  if  these  comii)i8.sioners  could 

^'Bot  Agree,  tht>y  were  to  Plule  their  grourvds  of  diflerence,  und  the 
Biihjeci  was  to  be  referred  to  the  nrh'fraiion  of  soine  friendly  Sover- 
«ign  or  SiHte,  to  he  nflerwnrdHngiccd  iipn  by  the  two  Governments. 
The  two  commissioners  exannned  (he  boundary,  explored  the  country, 

■feul  could  not  iigree. 

In  the  year  1823,  under  the  ndministrntion  of  j\Ir.  Monroe,  nego- 

'tmiions  were  commenced  with  a  view  of  agreeing  on  an  arbitration,  and 

these  negoiia  I  ions  terminated  in  a  cotivenlioti,  which  was  signed  in 

London,  on  the  29;h  September,  1827,  in  ihe  administration  of  Mr. 

Adams.     By  this  lime,  coliiRioiis  hai!  ahi^ady  begun  on  the  borders, 

•  notwilhstandiiig  it  had  been  undfTrtiood  ilmi  neither  party  ehould  ex- 
ercise exclusive  possession  [)eniliMg  the  negotiation.  Mr.  Adiima,  in 
'his  messagcj  of  December  8,  1827,  after  staling  ihe  conclusion  of 
the  convention  for  arbitration,  adds: 

"  While  thcHe  conventions  have  lieen  pcnd  nj,  incidents  have  occurred  of  conflicting 

•  pretenBions,  luid  of  a  dniigcroua  character,  upon  the  territory  itself  in  dispute  l)etween 
the  two  nations.  15y  a  common  understanding  lietween  the  Governments,  it  was  agreed 
that  no  exercise  of  exclusive  Jurisdiction  by  cither  parly,  while  the  negotiation  wa« 
pending,  should  chano;e  the  stale  of  the  queaii:)n  of  right  to  he  definitely  settled.  Such 
collision  has,  nevcrthclesa,  recently  taken  place,  by  occurrtnces  the  precise  character  of 
'  which  has  not  yet  been  ascertained." 

The  King  oi"  the  Netherlands  was  appointed  arbitrator,  and  he 
•  "Tnf.''e  his  award  on  ihe  10;h  of  January,  1831.     This  award  was 
satisfaciory  to  neither  parly;  it  was  rejected  by  both, and  so  the  whole 
matter  was  thrown  back  upon  its  original  condition. 

This  Inippened  in  the  first  term  of  Gen.  Jacktion's  administration. 
He  immcdiai(;ly  address*  •!  himself,  of  course,  io  new  eflbrte  for  the 
adjustment  of  tlie  controversy.  His  energy  and  diligence  ha. a  both 
'  been  much  commended  by  his  friend.^;  and  they  have  not  been  dis- 
paraged by  his  opponents.  He  called  to  his  aid,  in  the  Department 
of  Stale,  successively, Mr.  Van  Buren,  Mr.  Livingston, Mr.  McLane, 
and   Mr.  Foinyihe. 

Now,  Mr.  President,  let  us  see  what  progress  General   Jackson 
wade,  wiih  the  assistance  of  these  al»le  and  skilful  negotiators,  In 
•  tliis  highly  important  business.     Why,  sir,  the  whole  story  is  told 
'■'by  reference  to  his  several  annual  meswiges.      In  his  fourth  an- 
nual message,  December,  1832,  he  says:  "The  question  of  our 


9 


jHy:yNi4^  ' 


Norlhenstevn  Boundary  still  remains  unsettled."  In  December, 
1833,  lie  says:  "  The  inteieadng  (jueetion  of  our  Northoastern  Boim- 
dary  remains  still  undecided.  A  negotiation,  however,  upon  that, 
•ubject,  has  been  renewed  since  the  close  of  the  lust  Congress."  la 
December,  1834,  he  says:  "  The  question  of  the  Northeastern  Boun- 
dary is  still  pending  with  Great  Britain,  and  the  proposition  made  in 
accordance  with  the  resolution  of  the  Senate  for  the  establishment  of 
a  line  according  to  the  treaty  of  1783,  has  not  been  accepted  by  Uiat 
Government.  Believing  that  every  disposition  is  felt  on  both  sides  to 
adjust  this  perplexing  question  to  (he  satisfaction  of  all  (he  parties  in- 
terested in  it.  the  hope  is  yet  indulged  that  it  may  be  elTected  on  the 
basis  of  that  proposition."  In  December,  1835,  a  similar  story  is  re- 
hearsed: "  In  (he settlement  of  (he  question  of  (he  Nor(heastem  Boun- 
dary ,"  says  President  Jackson ,  "  little  progress  has  been  rriade.  Great 
Britain  has  dechned  acceding  to  (he  proposi(ion  of  the  Uni(ed  S(ate8, 
presented  in  accordance  wi(h  ...o  resolution  oi"  (he  Senate,  unless  cer- 
tain preliminary  conditions  are  admitted,  which  I  deemed  incoin|)n(i- 
ble  wi(h  a  satisfactory  and  rightful  adjustment  of  (he  controve  ';/' 
And  in  his  last  message,  (ho  President  gives  an  account  of  id  his  ef- 
forts, and  all  his  success,  in  regard  to  this  most  important  point  in  our 
foreign  relations,  in  these  words;  "  I  regret  to  say,  that  many  ques- 
tions of  an  interesting  nature,  at  issue  with  other  powers,  are  yet  un- 
adjusted; among  tl)e  most  prominent  of  these,  is  that  of  the  Northeast- 
ern Boundary.  With  an  undiminished  confiJence  in  the  sincere  desire 
of  his  Bri(annic  Majesty's  Government  to  adjust  that  question,  I  am 
not  yet  in  possession  of  the  precise  grounds  upon  which  it  proposes  a 
satisfactory  adjustment." 

Wi(h  all  his  confidence,  so  often  repeated,  in  the  sincere  desire  of 
England  to  adjust  the  dispute,  with  all  the  talents  and  industry  of  his 
3ucce6sive  cabinets,  this  question,  admitted  to  be  the  most  prominent 
of  all  those  on  which  we  were  at  issue  with  foreign  powers,  had  not 
advanced  one  step  since  the  rejection  of  the  Dutch  award,  nor  did 
Gen.  Jackson  know  the  grounds  upon  which  a  satisfactory  adjustment 
was  to  be  expected.  All  this  is  undeniably  (rue;  and  it  was  all  ad- 
mitted to  be  true  by  Mr.  Van  Buren  when  he  came  into  office;  for,  in 
his  first  aimual  message,  he  says: 

"Of  pending  questions  the  most  important  is  that  which  exists  with  the  Governnafint 
:  of  Great  Britain,  in  respect  to  our  Northeastern  Boundary.    It  is  wiih  unfeigned  regret 


10 

that  the  people  of  the  United  States  must  look  back  upon  the  abortive  efforts  made  by 
the  Executive  for  a  period  of  more  than  half  a  century,  to  determine  what  no  nation 
should  suffer  long  to  r.;main  in  dispute,  the  true  line  which  divides  its  possessions  from 
those  of  other  powers.  The  r''\ture  of  the  settlements  on  the  borders  of  the  United 
States,  and  of  the  neighboring  territory,  was  for  a  season  such,  that  this,  perhaps,  was 
not  indispensable  to  a  faithful  performance  of  the  duties  of  the  Federal  Government. 
Time  has,  however,  changed  ihe  state  of  things,  and  has  brought  about  a  condition  of 
affo  rs  in  which  the  true  interests  of  both  countries  imperatively  require  that  this  ques- 
tion should  be  put  nt  rest.  It  is  not  to  be  disguised  that,  with  full  confidence,  often  ex- 
pressed in  the  desire  cf  the  British  Government  to  terminate  it,  we  are  apparently  as 
far  from  its  adjustment  as  we  were  at  the  time  of  signing  the  treaty  of  peace,  1783." 
*  »  «  "The  conviction,  which  must  be  common  to  all,  of  the  injurious  consequen- 
ces that  result  from  keeping  open  this  irritating  question,  and  the  certainty  that  its  anal 
settlement  cannot  be  much  longer  deferred,  will,  I  trust,  lead  to  an  early  and  satisfactory 
adjustment.  At  your  last  session,  I  laid  before  you  the  recent  communications  betweem 
the  two  Governments,  and  between  this  Government  and  that  of  the  State  of  Maine,  in 
whose  solicitude,  concerning  a  subject  in  which  she  has  so  deep  an  interest,  every  por- 
tion of  the  Union  participates." 

Now,  sir,  let  us  pause  and  consider  ihis.  Here  we  are,  fifty-three 
years  from  the  date  of  the  Treaty  of  Peace,  and  the  boundaries  not 
yet  settled.  Gen.  .Jackson  has  tried  his  hand  at  the  business  fo"-  five 
years,  and  has  done  nothing.  He  cannot  make  the  thing  move. 
And  why  not?  Do  he  and  his  advisers  want  skill  and  energy,  or  are 
there  diificulties  in  the  nature  of  the  case,  not  to  be  overcome  till  some 
wiser  course  of  proceeding  shall  be  adopted?  Up  to  this  time  not 
one  step  of  progress  has  been  made.  This  is  admitted,  and  is,  indeed,, 
undeniable. 

Well, sir,  Mr.  Van  Buren  then  began  his  administration  under  the 
deepest  conviction  of  the  importance  of  the  question,  in  the  fullest 
confidence  in  the  sincerity  of  the  British  Government,  and  with  the 
consciousness  that  the  solicitude  of  Maine  concerning  the  subject, 
was  a  solicitude  in  which  every  portion  of  the  Union  participated. 

And  now,  sir,  what  did  he  do?  What  did  he  accomplish? 
What  progress  did  hs  make?  What  step,  forward,  did  he  take,  in 
the  whole  course  of  his  administration?  Seeing  the  full  importance 
of  the  subject,  addressing  himself  to  it,  and  not  doubting  the  just  dis- 
position of  England ,  I  ask  again ,  what  did  he  do  ?  What  did  he  do  T 
What  advance  did  he  n.ake?  Sir,  not  one  step,  in  his  whole  four 
yviWii.  Or,  railter,  if  he  made  any  advance  at  all,  it  was  an  advance 
backward;  for,  undoubtedly,  he  left  the  question  in  a  much  worse 
condition  than  he  found  it,  not  only  on  account  of  the  disturbances; 


11 


and  outbreaks  which  had  taken  place  on  (he  border,  for  the  want  of 
an  ndju8tment,  and  which  dislurbaiiccs,  ihciiiselves,  hud  raised  new 
and  difficult  questions,  but  on  account  of  the  iniriiacics,  and  com- 
plexities, and  perplexities,  in  which  the  correspondence  had  become 
involved.  There  was  a  mesh — an  en;nnglemerit,  which  rendered  it 
far  more  difficult  to  proceed  with  the  subject  than  if  the  question  had 
been  ftesh  and  unembarrassed. 

I  must  now  ask  the  Senate  to  indulge  me  in  something  more  of 
an  extended  and  particular  refcrtMice  lo  proofs  and  papeis,lhan  is  \n 
5  accordance  with  my  general  habits  in  debate;  because  I  wish  to  pre- 
sent to  the  Senate,  and  to  the  country,  the  grounds  of  what  1  have 
just  said. 

And  let  us  follow  the  administration  o(  Mr.  Van  Buren,  from  his 
first  messa{^'e,and  see  how  this  iiiiporiarit  matter  fares  in  his  hands. 

On  the  20ih  of  Miuch,  183S,  he  sent  a  message  to  the  Senate, 
with  a  correspondence  between  Mr.  Pox  and  Mr.  Porsythe.  In  this 
correspondence  Mr.  Pox  says: 

"The  United  Stales  Government  hiive  propnged  two  modes  in  wliicli  sucli  a  commis- 
sion might  be  constituted;  first,  that  it  might  cons  st  of  commissioners,  nomed  in  equal 
numbers,  by  each  of  the  two  Governments,  with  an  umpire  to  he  ^eIecled  by  some 
friendly  European  power.  Secondly,  that  it  might  be  entirely  composed  of  s-jeniific 
Europeans  to  be  selected  by  a  friendly  sovereign,  and  m'ght  be  accompanied,  in  its  oper- 
ations, by  agents  of  the  two  different  parties,  in  order  that  such  agents  might  give  to  the 

commissioners  assistance  and  information. 

♦  ♦♦#*•• 

Her  Maiesty's  Government  have,  themselves,  already  stated  thai  they  have  little  ex- 
pectation that  such  a  commission  could  lead  to  any  useful  result,  and  that  they  would, 
on  that  account,  be  disposed  to  object  to  it;  and  if  Her  Majesty's  Government  were  now 
to  agree  to  appoint  such  a  commission,  it  would  on'y  be  in  com  <liance  with  the  desire 
so  strongly  expresseii'  by  the  Government  of  the  United  Stales,  and  in  spite  of  doubts, 
■which  lier  MajestyV,  Government  still  continue  lo  Ci'tertain,  of  the  effic,a<y  of  the  mea- 
sure." 

To  this  Mr.  Forsythe  replies,  that  he  perceives,  with  feelings  of 
deep  disappointment,  that  the  answer  to  the  propositions  of  the  United 
Statts  is  so  indefinite, as  to  render  it  impracticable  to  ascertain,  with- 
out further  discussion,  what  are  tho  real  wie^hes  and  ini«ntions  of 
Her  Majesty's  Government.  Here,  then,  a  new  discussion  arises, 
lo  find  out,  if  it  can  be  found  out,  what  ihe  parlies  metin.  Mean- 
time Mr.  Forsythe  writes  a  letter,  of  twenty  or  thirty  pages,  to  the 
Governor  of  Maine,  concluding  with  a  suggestion  lh.it  His  Excellency 


1^2 

vS|hjgijald  tftke  mef^ares  to  ^cert^in  the  sense  of  the  State  of  Maine, 
.^y/llh  respect  to  the  expediency  of  a  conventional  line.     This  corres- 

poj^dpnce  repeals  the  proposition  of  a  joint  exploration,  by  commia- 

.,«jpn,ers,  a.nd,  Mr.  Fox  accedes  to  it,  in  deference  to  ihe  wishes  of  the 

,|Lfoited.  States,  hut  with  very  Ijttle  hope  that  any  good  will  come  of  it. 

Here  is  the  upshot  of  one  whole  year's  work.     Mr.  Yan  Buren 

sums  it  up  thus,  in  his  iriessage  of  December,  1839: 

"  With  respect  to  the  Noitheaatern  Boundary  of  the  United  States,  no  official  cprrcs- 
pondence  between  this  Government  and  that  o  Great  Britain  has  passed  since  that 
communicated  to  Congress  towards  the  close  of  their  last  session.  The  offer  to  negoti- 
ate a  convention  for  the  appointment  of  a  joint  commission  of  survey  and  exploration, ♦ 
am,  .however,  assured  will  be  met  by  Her  M.vjosty's  Government  in  a  conciliatory  and 
friendly  spirit,  and  inalructions  to  enable  the  tiritish  Minister  I'.ere  to  conclude  such  an 
arrangenjenl  will  be  transmitted  to  him  without  needless  delay," 

We  may  now  look  for  instructions  to  Mr.  Fox,  to  conclude  an  ar- 
rangement for  a  joint  conrimission  of  survey  and  exploration.  Sur- 
;yey  and  exploration  !  As  if  there  htid  not  already  been  enough  of 
both !  But  thus  terminates  1839,  with  a  hope  of  coming  to  an  agree- 
ment for  a  survey  !     Great  progress  this,  surely. 

And  now  we  come  to  1839;  and  what,  sir,  think  you,  was  the 
product  of  diplomatic  fertility  and  cultivation,  in  the  year  1839.  Sir, 
tlie  harvest  was  one  project  y  and  one  coun'er  project. 

On  the  20th  of  May  Mr.  P^x  sent  to  Mr.  Forsythe  a  Jraughi  of  a  con- 
vention for  a  joint  exploration,  by  comitiissioneis,  the  commissioners 
to  make  report  to  their  respective  Governnjents. 

This  was  the  British  joro/Vc^. 

On  the  29th  of  July  Mr.  Forsythe  sent  to  Mr.  Fox  a  counter  pro- 
ject, embracing  the  principle  of  arbii ration.  By  this,  if  the  cominis- 
sioners  did  not  agree,  a  reference  was  to  be  had  to  three  persons, 
jBelected  by  three  friendly  Sovereigns  or  Stales;  and  these  arbitrators 
might  order  another  survey.  Here  the  parties,  apparently  fatigued 
with  their  efforts,  paused;  and  the  labors  of  the  year  are  thus  re- 
|ieiar?ed  and  recapitulated  by  Mr.  Van  Buien  at  the  end  of  the  season: 

"For  the  settlement  of  our  nortlieastern  boundary,  the  proposition  promised  by  Great 
Britain  for  a  commission  of  exploration  and  survey,  iius  been  received,  and  a  counter 
project,  including  also  a  provision  for  the  certain  and  final  adjustment  of  the  limits  in 
dia.mte,  is  now  before  tlie  British  Government  for  its  consideration.  A  just  regard  to 
the  delicate  state  of  this  question,  and  a  proj)er  respect  for  the  natural  impatience  of  the 
State  of  Maine,  not  less  than  a  conviction  tliat  the  negotiation  has  been  already  pro- 
tracted longer  than  la  prudent  on  the  part  of  eitlier  Government,  liave  lod  me  to  believe 


• 


lb' 

tliat  the  present  favorable  moment  should,  on  no  account,  be  suffered  to  pass  withoui: 
putting  tlie  question  forever  at  rest.  1  feel  confident  that  the  Government  of  Her  Bri- 
tannic Majesty  will  take  the  same  view  of  the  subjeot,  na  I  am  persuaded  it  is  governed 
by  desires  equally  strong  and  sincere  for  the  amiicable  termination  of*  the  contrbversy."' 

Here,  sir,  in  this  ''delicate  state  of  the  question"  all  things  rested',' 
till  the  next  year.  * 

Early  after  thfe  commencement  of  the  warm  weather,  in  1840,  the 
industrious  diplomatists  resumed  their  severe  and  rigorous  labors,  and 
on  the  22d  June,  1840,  Mr.  Fox  writes  thus  to  Mr.  Forsythe: 

"The  British  Government  and  the  Government  of  the  U.  S.  agreed,  two  years  ago, 
that  a  survey  of  the  disputed  territory,  by  a  joint  commission,  would  be  the  measure 
beit  calculated  to  elucidate  and  solve  the  questions  at  issue.  The  President  proposed' 
such  a  commission,  and  Her  Mnjesty's  Governnient  consented  to  it;  and  it  was  believed 
t)y  Her  Majesty's  Government,  that  the  general  prinijiples  upon  which  the  commission" 
war  to  be  guided  in  its  local  operations  had  been  r  .ttled  by  mutual  agreement,  arrived 
at  by  means  of  a  correspondence  which  took  place  between  the  *o  Governments  in 
1837  and  1838.  Her  Majesty's  Government  accordingly  transmitted,  in  April  of  last' 
year,  for  the  consideration  of  the  President,  a  draught  of  the  convention,  to  regul&te  lh& 
proceedings  of  the  proposed  convention."  ,^  •,,  11' •' 

"The  preamble  of  that  draught  recited,  textually,  the  agreement  that  had  been  come 
to  by  means  of  notes  wliich  had  been  exchanged  between  tlic  two  Governments;  and  ths 
articles  of  the  draught  were  framed,  as  Her  Majesty's  Government  considered,  in  strict 
conformity  with  that  agreement. 

"  But  the  Government  of  the  U.  S.  did  not  think  proper  to  assent  to  the  conventioa 
80  proposed. 

"  The  U.  S.  Government  did  not,  indeed,  allege  that  the  proposed  convention  was  at 
variance  with  the  result  of  the  previous  correspondence  between  the  two  Governments^ 
but  it  thought  that  the  convention  would  cKtablish  a  commission  of 'mere  explooiiion 
and  survey;'  and  the  President  was  of  opinion  that  the  step  next  to  be  taken  by  thetw»> 
Governments  should  be  to  contract  stipuU'tious,  bearing  upon  the  face  of  them  the  pro- 
mise of  a  final  settlement,  under  some  form  or  other,  and  within  a  reasonable  time. 

"The  U.  S.  Government  accordingly  transmitted  to  the  undersign  d,  for  communica- 
tion to  Her  Majesty's  Government,  in  the  month  of  July  last,  a  counter  draught  of  convert^ 
tion,  varying  considerably  in  some  parts  (as  the  Secretary  of  State  of  the  U.  S.  admit- 
ted, in  his  letter  to  tlie  undersigned  of  the  29th  of  July  last)  from  the  draught  proposed 

by  Great  Britain."  ,        _ 

#  #  «  «#  ### 

"There  was,  undoubtedly,  one  essential  difference  between  the  British  draught  and- 
the  American  counter  draught. 

"The  British  draught  contained  no  provision  embodying  the  principle  of  arbitration. 
The  American  counter  draught  did  contain  such  a  provision. 

"The  British  draught  contained  no  provision  for  arbitration,  because  the  principle  of 
arbitration  had  not  been  proposed  r  either  side  during  the  negotiations  upon  wliich 
that  draught  was  founded  ;  and  because,  moreover,  it  was  understood,  at  that  time,  that 
the  principle  of  arbitration  would  be  decidedly  objected  to  by  the  United  States.  But 
as  the  U.  S.  Government  have  now  expressed  a  wish  to  embody  the  principle  of  arbi- 


14 

tration  in  the  proposed  conTenUon,  Her  Majesty's  Goremment  are  perfectly  willing  tO) . 
«ocede  to  that  wish. 

"The  undersigned  is  accordingly  instructed  to  state,  officially  to  Mr.  Forsythe,  that 
Her  Majesty's  Government  consent  to  the  two  principles  which  form  the  main  founda- 
tion of  the  American  counter  draught,  namely:  first,  that  the  commission  to  be  appoint- 
ed shall  be  so  constituted  as  necessarily  to  lead  to  a  final  settlement  of  the  questions  of 
boundarysat  issue  between  the  two  countries ;  and,  secondly,  that,  in  order  to  secure 
such  a  result,  the  convention  by  which  the  commission  is  to  be  created,  shall  contain  a 
provision  for  arbitration  upon  paints  as  to  which  the  British  and  American  commission 
•may  no^be  al  le  to  aj^ree. 

"The  undersigned  is,  however,  instructed  to  add,  that  there  are  many  matters  of  de- 
toil  in  the  American  counter  draught  which  Her  Majesty's  Government  cannot  adopt. 

''The  undersigned  will  be  furnished  from  his  Government,  by  un  early  opportunity, 
■with  an  amended  draught,  in  conformity  with  ihe  principles  above  stated,  to  be  submit- 
ted to  the  consideration  of  the  Pies  dent.  And  the  undersigned  expects  to  he  at  the 
same  time  furnished  with  instructions  to  propose  to  the  Government  of  the  U.S.  a  fresh, 
local,  and  temporary  convention,  for  the  better  prevention  of  incidental  border  collisions 
within  the  disputed  territory  during  tjje  time  that  may  be  occupied  in  carrying  through 
the  operations  of  survey  or  arbitration." 

And  on  i!ie  26ili  of  Jtine  Mr.  Forsythe  replies,  and  says: 

"That  he  derives  great  sntsfaction  from  the  announcement  that  Her  Majesty's  Gov- 
ernment do  not  relinquish  tHb  hope  that  the  sincere  desire  which  is  felt  by  both  parties 
to  arrive  at  an  amicable  settlement,  will  at  length  be  attended  with  success;  and  from 
the  prospect  held  out  ly  Mr.  Fox  of  his  being  accordingly  furnished,  by  an  early  op- 
porlunity,  with  the  draught  of  a  proposition  amended  in  conformity  with  the  principles 
to  which  Her  Majesty's  Government  has  acceded,  to  be  submitted  to  the  consideration 
of  this  Government." 

On  the  28ili  of  July,  1840,  ihe  British  amended  draught  came. 
This  draiighl  proposed  ihat  commissioners  should  be  appointed,  as 
before,  to  iriake  exploration;  thai  umpires  or  arbitrators  should  be  ap- 
pointed by  three  friendly  sovereigns,  and  that  the  arbitration  should  sit 
in  Germany,  at  Frankfort  on  the  Maine.  And  the  draught  contains 
many  articles  of  arrangement  and  detail,  for  carrying  the  exploration 
and  arbitration  into  eflect. 

At  the  same  lime  Mr.  Fox  sends  to  Mr.  Forsythe  the  report  of  two 
British  connrii^sioners,  Messrs.  Mudge  and  Featherstonh-uigh,  who 
bad  made  an  ex  parte  survey  in  1839.  An\\  a  most  ex'raordinary 
report  it  was.  These  gentlemen  had  discovered ,  that  up  to  that  time, 
nobody  had  been  right;  they  run  the  line  still  farther  south  than  any 
btjdy  had  ever  imagined,  and  discovered  highlands  which,  in  all  pre- 
vious exaininalions  and  explorations,  had  escaped  all  mortal  eyes. 

Here,  then,  we  hiid  om project  niore,  for  exploration  and  arbitra- 
tion, together  with  a  report  from  the  British  commissioners  of  survey, 


}ff 


f 


pushing  the  British  claiuis  still  further  into  the  territories  of  the  State 
of  Maine. 

And  on  the  13th  of  August,  there  comes  again,  as  matter  of  course, 
from  Mr.  Forsythe,  another  counter  project .  Lord  Palmerston  is 
never  richer  in  projects,  than  Mr.  Forsythe  is  in  counter  pro- 
jects. There  is  always  a  Rowland  for  an  Oliver.  This  counter 
project  of  the  13lh  of  August,  1840,  was  drawn  in  the  retirement  of 
Albany.  It  consists  of  18  articles,  which  it  is  hardly  necessary  to 
describe  particularly.  Of  course,  it  proceeds  on  the  two  principles 
already  agreed  on,  of  exploration  and  arbitration;  but  in  all  matters 
of  arrangement  and  detail,  it  was  quite  different  from  Lord  Palmer- 
ston's  draught,  communicated  by  Mr.  Fox. 

And  here  the  rapid  march  of  diplomacy  came  to  a  dead  halt.  Mr. 
Fox  found  so  many,  and  such  great,  changes  proposed  to  the  British 
draught,  that  he  did  jiot  incline  to  discuss thejn.  He  did  not  believe 
the  British  Government  would  ever  agree  to  Mr.  Forsythe's  plan, 
but  he  would  send  it  home,  and  see  what  could  be  done  with  it. 

Thus  stood  matters  at  the  end  of  1840,  and  in  his  message,  at 

the  meeting  of  Congress  in  December  of  that  year,  his  valedictory 

message,  Mr.  Van  Bu^en  thus  describes  that  condition  of  things,  which 

he  found  to  be  the  result  of  his  four  years  of  negotiation. 

"  In  my  last  annual  message  you  were  informed  that  a  proposition  for  a  commission 
of  exploration  and  survey,  promised  by  Great  Britain,  had  been  received,  and  that  a 
counter  project,  including  also  a  provision  for  the  certain  and  final  adjustment  of  the 
the  limits  in  dispute,  was  then  before  the  British  Government  for  its  consideration. 
The  answer  of  that  Government,  accompanied  by  additional  propositions  of  its  own, 
was  received  through  its  minister  here,  since  your  separation.  These  were  promptly 
considered ;  such  as  were  deemed  correct  in  principle,  and  consistent  with  a  due  regard 
to  the  just  rights  of  the  United  Stales  and  of  the  State  of  Maine,  concurred  in;  and  the 
reasons  for  dissenting  from  the  residue,  with  an  additional  suggestion  on  our  part,  com- 
municated by  the  Secretary  of  State  to  Mr.  Fox.  That  minister,  not  feeling  himself 
sufficiently  instructed  upon  some  of  the  points  raised  in  the  discussion,  felt  it  to  be  his 
duty  to  refer  the  matter  to  his  own  Government  for  its  farther  decision." 

And  now,  sir,  who  will  deny  that  this  is  a  very  promising  londilion 
of  things,  to  exist  fifty-oeven  years  after  the  conclusion  of  the 
treaty! 

Here  is  the  British  project  for  exploration;  then  the  American 
counter  project  for  exploiation,  to  be  the  foundation  of  arbitration. 
Next,  the  answer  of  Great  Britain  to  our  counter  project,  slating  divers 
exceptions  and  objections  to  it,  and  with  sundry  new  and  additional 


■ 


10 

propositions  of  her  own.  Some  of  these  were  concurred  in,  but' 
others  dissented  from,  and  other  additional  suggestions  on  our  iwrt' 
were  proposed;  and  all  these  concurrences,  dissents, and  new  sugges- 
tions were  brought  together  and  incorporated  into  Mr.  Forsythe's  last 
labor  (^  diplomacy,  at  least  his  last  labor  in  regard  to  this  subject,  his 
counter  project  of  August  the  13th  ,1840.  That  counter  project  was 
sent  to  England,  to  see  what  Lord  Palmerston  could  make  of  it.  It 
fared  in  the  Foreign  Office,  just  as  Mr.  Fox  had  foretold.  Lord  Pal- 
merston would  have  nothing  to  do  with  it.  He  would  not  answer  it; 
he  would  not  touch  it;  he  gave  up  the  negotiation  in  apparent  despair. 
Two  years  before,  the  parties  had  agreed  on  the  principle  of  joint 
exploration ,  and  the  principle  of  arbitration.  But  in  their  subsequent 
correspondence,  on  matters  of  detail,  modes  of  proceeding,  and  sub- 
ordinate arrangements,  they  had,  through  the  whole  two  years,  con- 
stantly receded  farther,  and  farther, and  farther, from  each  other.  They 
were  flying  apart;  and,  like  two  orbs,  going  off  in  opposite  directions^ 
could  only  meet  after  they  should  have  traversed  the  whole  circle. 

But  this  exposition  of  the  case  does  not  describe,  by  any  means, all  the 
difficulties  and  embarrassments  arising  from  the  unsettled  state  of  the 
controversy.     We  all  remember  the  troubles  of  1839.     Something 
like  a  border  war  had  broke  out.     Maine  had  raised  an  armed  civil 
posse;  she  fortified  the  line,  or  points  on  the  line,  of  territory,  to  keep 
off  intruders  and  to  defend  possession .  There  was  Fort  Fairfield ,  Fort 
Kent,  and  I  know  not  what  other  fortresses,  all  memorable  in  history. 
The  legislature  of  Maine  had  placed  eight  hundred  thousand  dollars 
at  the  discretion  of  the  Governor,  to  be  used  for  the  military  de- 
fence of  the  State.     Major  General  Scott  had  repaired  to  the  frontier, 
and  under  his  mediation,  an  agreement,  a  sort  of  treaty,  respecting  the 
temporary  possession  of  the  two  parties,  of  the  territory  in  dispute, 
was  entered  into  between  the  Governors  of  Maine  and  New  Bruns- 
wick.    But  as  it  could  not  be  foreseen  how  long  the  principal  dispute 
would  be  protracted,  Mr.  Fox,  as  has  already  been  seen,  wrote  home 
for  instructions  for  another  treaty — a  treaty  of  less  dignify — a  collate- 
ral treaty — a  treaty  to  regulate  the  terms  of  possession ,  and  the  means 
of  keeping  the  peace  of  the  frontier,  while  the  number  of  years  should 
roll  away,  necessary,  first,  to  spin  cut  the  whole  thread  of  diplomacy 
in  forming  a  convention;  next,  for  three  or  four  years  of  joint  ex- 
ploration of  seven  hundred  miles  of  disputed  boundary  in  the  wilder- 


i 


17 

i.es8  of  North  America;  and,  finally,  to  learn  the  results  of  an  arbi- 
tration which  was  to  sit  at  Frankfort  on  the  Maine,  composed  of 
learned  doctors  from  the  German  universities. 

Really,sir,isnotthisamostdelightfuIprospect?  Is  there  not  here  as 
beautiful  a  labyrinth  of  diplomacy  as  one  could  whh  to  look  at,  of  a 
summer's  day  ?  Would  not  Castlereagh  and  Talleyrand ,  Nesselrode 
and  Metternich,  find  it  an  entanglement  worthy  tlie  labor  of  their 
■own  hands  to  unravel?  Is  it  not  apparent,  Mr.  President,  that  a*  this 
4ime  the  settlement  of  the  question,  by  this  kind  of  diplomacy,  if  to 
be  reached  by  any  vision,  required  telescopic  sight?  The  country 
was  settling;  individual  rights  were  getting  into  collision  ;  it  was  im- 
possible  to  prevent  disputes  and  disturbances;  every  consideration  re- 
quired,  that  whatever  was  to  be  done  should  be  done  quickly;  and 
yet  every  thing,  thus  far,  had  waited  the  sluggish  flow  of  the  cur- 
rent of  diplomacy.     Labitw  et  labetur. 

I  have  already  stated,  that  on  the  receipt  of  Mr.  Forsythe's  last 
counter  plan,  orcounter  project.  Lord  Palmerston,  at  last,  paused.  He 
did  so.  The  British  Government  appears  to  have  made  up  its  mind  that 
nothing  was  to  be  expected,  at  that  time,  from  pursuing  farther  this 
battledore  play  of  projets  and  contre  projets.  What  occurred  in 
England,  we  collect  from  the  published  debates  of  the  House  of  Com- 
mons. From  these  we  learn,  that  after  General  Harrison's  election, 
and,  indeed, after  his  death,  and  in  the  first  year  of  Mr.  Tyler's  Pre- 
sidency, Lord  Palmerston  wrote  to  Mr.  Fox  as  follows : 

"  Her  Majesty'^  Government  received,  with  very  great  regret,  the  second  American 
Td  thetSh  1^  a  convention  for  determining  the  boundary  between  the  United  States 
and  the  Brmsh  North  American  Provinces,  which  you  transmitted  to  me  last  autumn 
.n  your  despatch  of  the  15th 'of  August,  1840,  because  that  counter-draught  cola^lTo' 
-many  madm.ssible  propositions,  that  it  plainly  showed  that  Her  Majesty's  Government 
could  enterta^  no  hope  of  concluding  any  arrangement  on  this  subject  with  theJZn- 
mentofMr.Van  Buren,  and  that  there  was  no  use  in  taking  any  further  step^n  the 
negotjations  til.  the  new  President  should  come  mto  power.  ^Majes;-  G  ve  n 
menthadcertamly  been  persuaded  that  a  draught  wh.ch,  in  pursuance  of  your  instructln 

zir:T:T7T''''^  *'"  '^  ^^^"^  "^  '^-'y^  i«^«' — f-'n : ;  vst ' 

and  so  well  calculated  to  bnng  the  diflerences,  between  the  two  Governments  abou  the 
boundary,  to  a  just  and  satisfactory  conclusion,  that  it  would  have  been  at  o  ce  acTep  ed 
by  he  Government  of  the  United  States;  or  that  ,f  the  American  Governn.en       dpi' 

ters  of  detail  and  would  not  have  borne  upon  any  essential  points  of  the  arraLment  • 
and  Her  Majesty  s  Government  were  the  more  confirmed  in  tins  hope,  becat.:  aZ  ^ 
all  the  mam  pnnciples  of  the  arrangement  which  that  draught  wa^inlended  to  carry 


18 


into  execution,  had,  as  Her  Majesty's  Government  conceived,  been  either  sug-geated  by,, 
or  agreed  to  by,  the  United  States  Government  itself." 

Lord  Palmerston  is  represented  to  have  said,  in  this  despatch 
of  Mr.  Forsythe'scounter  project,  that  he  "cannot  agree"  to  the  pre- 
amble; that  he  "cannot  consent"  to  the  second  article;  that  he  "must 
object  to  the  4th  article;"  that  the  "7th  article  imposed  incompatible 
duties;"  and  to  every  article  there  was  an  objection,  slated  in  a 
different  form,  until  he  reached  the  10th,  and  that,  as  to  that,  "none 
could  be  more  inadmissible." 

This  was  the  s(ate  of  the  negotiation,  a  few  days  before  Lord  PaU 

merston's  retirement.     But,  nevertheless,  his  Lordship  would  make 

one  more  attempt,  now  that  there  was  a  new  administration  here^ 

and  he  would  make  "?ieio proposals.'^     And  what  were  they? 

"And  what  does  the  House  think,"  said  Sir  R.  Peel,  in  the  House  of  Commons,  "were 
the  noble  Lord's  proposals  in  that  desperate  state  of  circumstances?  The  proposal  of 
the  noble  Lord,  after  fifty-eight  yeara  of  controversy,  submitted  by  him  to  the  Ameri- 
can Government  for  the  purpose  of  a  speedy  settlement,  was  that  commissioners  should 
l)e  nominated  on  both  sides;  that  they  should  attempt  to  make  settlement  of  this  long 
disputed  question ;  and  then,  if  that  failed,  that  the  King  of  Prussia,  the  King  of  Sar- 
dinia, and  the  King  of  Saxony,  were  to  be  called  in,  not  to  act  as  umpires,  but  they 
were  each  to  be  requested  to  name  a  scientific  man,  and  that  these  three  members  of 
a  scientific  commission  should  proceed  to  arbitrate.  Was  there  ever  a  proposition 
like  this  suggested  for  the  arrangement  of  a  question  on  which  two  countries  had  dif- 
fered for  fifty-eight  years  ?  And  this,  too,  was  proposed  after  the  failure  of  the  arbi- 
tration on  the  part  of  the  King  of  Holland,  and  when  they  had  had  their  commission' 
of  exploration  in  vain.  And  yet,  with  all  this,  there  were  to  be  three  scientific  men, 
foreign  professors — one  from  Prussia,  one  from  Sardinia,  and  one  from  Saxony !  To 
do  what  ?  And  where  were  they  to  meet ;  or  how  were  they  to  come  to  a  satisfactory 
adjustment?" 

It  was  asked  in  the  House  of  Commons,  not  inaptly,  what  would 
the  people  of  Maine  think,  when  they  should  read  that  they  were  tO" 
be  visited  by  three  learned  foreigners,  one  from  Prussia,  one  from! 
Saxony,  and  one  from  Sardinia?  To  be  sure;  what  would  they 
think,  when  they  should  see  three  learned  foreign  professors,  each 
speaking  a  different  language,  and  none  of  them  the  English  or  Ame- 
rican tongue,  among  the  swamps  and  morasses  of  Maine,  in  summer,, 
or  wading  through  its  snows  in  winter;  on  the  AUagash,  the  Maca- 
davie,  or  among  the  moose  deer,  on  the  precipitous  and  lofty  shores  of 
Lake  Pohemagamook — and  for  what?  To  find  where  the  division 
was,  between  Maine  and  New  Brunswick  !  Instructing  themselves,, 
by  these  labors,  that  they  might  repair  to  Frankfort  on  the  Maine,  and 


t"" 


19 

there  hold  solemn  and  scientific  arbitration  on  the  question  of  a  boun- 
dary line,  in  one  of  the  deepest  wildernesses  of  North  America ! 

Sir,  I  do  not  know  what  might  have  happened,  if  this  project 
had  gone  on.  Possibly,  sir,  but  that  your  country  has  called  you 
to  higher  duties,  you  might  now  have  been  at  Frankfort  on  the  Maine,, 
the  advocate  of  our  cause  before  the  scientific  arbitration.  If  not 
yourself,  some  one  of  the  honorable  members  here  very  probably 
would  have  been  employed  in  attempting  to  utter  the  almost  unspfeak- 
able  names,  bestowed  by  the  northeastern  Indians  on  American  hikes 
and  streams,  in  the  heart  of  Germany. 

Mr.  Fox,  it  is  said,  on  reading  his  despatch,  replied,  with  charac- 
teristic promptitude  and  good  sense,  ''for  God's  sake  save  us  from  the 
philosophers.  Have  sovereigns,  if  you  please,  but  no  professional 
men  " 


>> 


But  Mr.  Fox  was  instructed ,  as  it  now  appears,  to  renew  his  exer- 
tions to  carry  forward  the  arbitration.  ''Let  us,"  said  Lord  Palmer- 
ston,  in  writing  to  him,  "let  us  consider  the  American  contre  projetos 
unreasonable,  undeserving  of  answer,  as  withdrawn  from  considera- * 
tion,  and  now  submit  my  original  projet  to  Mr,  Webster,  the  new 
Secretary  of  State,  and  persuade  him  it  is  reasonable." 

With  all  respect,  sir,  to  Lord  Palmerston,  Mr.  Webster  was  not  to 
be  so  persuaded;  that  is  to  say,  he  was  not  persuaded  that  it  was  rea- 
sonable, or  wise,  or  prudent  to  pursue  the  negotiation  in  this  form,  fur- 
ther. He  hoped  to  live  long  enough  to  see  the  northeastern  boun- 
dary settled;  but  that  hope  was  faint,  unless  he  could  rescue  the  ques- 
tion from  the  labyrinth  of  projects  and  counter  prqiects,  explorations 
and  arbitration,  in  which  it  was  involved.  He  could  not  reasonably 
expect  that  he  had  another  whole  half  century  of  life  before  him. 

Mr.  President,  it  is  true,  that  I  viewed  the  case  as  hopeless,  with- 
out an  entire  change  in  the  manner  of  proceeding.  I  found  ilie  par- 
ties already  "in  wandering  mazes  lost."  I  found  it  quite  as  tedious 
and  difficult  to  tYace  the  thread  of  this  intricate  negotiation,  as  it 
would  be  to  run  out  the  line  of  the  Highlands  itself.  ( )ne  was  quite 
as  full  as  the  other  of  deviations,  abrupme3ses,and  perplexities.  And 
having  received  the  President's  (Mr.  Tyler's)  authority,  I  did  say  to 
Mr.  Fox,  as  has  been  stated  in  the  British  Parliament,  that  I  was 
willihg  to  attempt  to  settle  the  dispute  by  agreeing  on  a  conventional 
line,  or  line  by  compromise. 


20 

Mr.    President,  I  was  fully  aware  of  the  ditficulty  of  the  un- 
dertaking.     I    ^nvv   it    was  a  serious  affair   to   call   on   Maine   to 
come  into  an  agreement,  by  which  .she  might  subject  herself  to  the 
loss  of  territory  which  slie  regarded  as  clearly  her  own.     The  fiuea- 
tion  touched  her  proprietary  interests,  and  what  was  more  delicate,  it 
touched  the  extent  of  her  jurisdiction.     I  knew  well  her  extreme 
jealousy  and  high  feeling  on  this  point.*     But  I  believed  in  her  pa- 
tri(Jtisin,  and  in  her  willingness  to  make  sacrifices  for  the  good  of  the 
country.     I  trusted,  loc ,  that  her  own  good  sense  would  lead  her, 
while  she,  doubtless,  preferred  the  strict  execution  of  the  treaty,  as 
she  understood  it,  to  any  line  by  compromise,  to  see,  nevertheless, 
that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  was  already  pledged  to  ar- 
bitration, by  its  own  proposition  and  the  agreement  of  Great  Britain; 
that  this  arbitration  might  not  be  concluded  and  finished  for  many 
years,  and  that, after  all,  the  result  might  be  doubtful.     With  this  re- 
liance on  the  patriotism  and  good  sense  of  Maine,  and  with  the  sanc- 
tion of  the  President ,  I  was  willing  to  make  an  efiort  to  establish  a 
boundary  by  direct  compromise  and  agreement— by  acts  of  the  par- 
ties themselves,  which  they  could  understand  and  judge  of  for  them- 
selves— by  a  proceeding  which  left  nothing  to  the  future  judgment  of 
others,  and  by  which  the  controversy  could  be  settled  in  six  months. 
And,  sir,  I  leave  it  to  the  Senate  to  day,  and  the  country  always,  to 
say,  how  far  this  offer  and  this  effort  were  wise  t)r  unwise, statesman- 
like or  unstatesmanlike-  beneficial  or  injurious. 

Well,  sir,  in  the  autu...  1841 ,  it  was  known  in  England  to  be 
the  opinion  of  the  American  Government, .that  it  was  not  advisable 
to  prosecute  further  the  scheme  of  arbitration ;  that  that  Government 
was  ready  to  open  a  negotiation  for  a  conventional  line  of  boundary; 
and  a  letter  from  Mr.  Everett,  dated  on  the  31st  of  December,  an- 


•  It  is  now  well  known,  that  in  1832,  an  agreement  waa  entered  into  between  some  of 
the  Heads  of  Departments  at  Washington,  viz:  Messrs.  Livingston,  McLane,  and 
AVoodbury ,  under  the  direction  of  President  Jackson,  on  the  part  of  the  United  States,  and 
Messrs.  Preble,  Williams  and  Emery,  on  the  part  of  the  Government  of  Maine,  by 
which  it  was  stipulated  that  Maine  should  surrender  to  the  United  States  the  territory 
which  she  claimed  beyond  the  line  designated  by  the  King  of  the  Netherlands,  and  re- 
ceive, as  an  indemnity,  one  million  of  acres  of  the  public  lands,  to  be  selected  by  her- 
.self,  in  Michigan.  The  existence  of  this  treaty  was  not  known  for  some  time,  and  it  waa 
never  ratified  by  tlie  high  contracting  parties, 


21 


nounced  the  determination  of  (lie  Britiah  Government  to  send  a  spe- 
cial  minister  to  (he  United  States,  authorized  to  settle  all  matters  in 
diflerence,  and  (he  selection  of  Lord  Ashburton  for  that  (rust.*  This 
letter  was  answered,  on  the  29(h  of  January,  by  an  assurance  that 
Lord  Ashburton  would  be  received  with  the  respect  due  to  his  Gov- 
ernment and  to  himself.f  Lord  Ashburton  arrived  in  Washington 
on  the  4(h  of  A  -il,  1842,  and  was  presented  to  the  President  on 
theGth. 

On  the  Uth,  a  letter  was  written  from  the  Department  of  State  to 
(he  Governor  of  Maine,  announcing  his  arrival,  and  his  declaration 
that  lie  had  authority  to  treat  for  a  conventional  line  of  boundary,  or 
line  by  agreement,  on  mutual  conditions,  considerations,  and  equiva- 
lents.+ 

The  Governor  of  Maine  was  informed  that, 

"Under  these  circumstances,  the  President  had  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  call  the  serious 
attention  of  the  Governments  of  Manie  and  Massachusetts  to  the  subject,  and  to  submit 
to  those  Governments  the  propriety  of  their  co-operution,  to  a  certain  extent,  and  in  a 
certain  form,  in  an  endeavor  to  terminate  a  controversy  already  of  so  Ion-  duration  and 
which  seems  very  likely  to  be  still  considerably  further  protracted  before  the  desired  end 
of  a  final  adjustment  shall  be  attained,  unless  a  shorter  course  of  arriving  at  that  end  be 
adopted  than  such  as  haa  heretofore  been  pursued,  and  as  the  two  Governments  are  sUll 
pursuing. 

"The  opinion  of  this  Government  upon  the  justice  and  validity  of  the  American 
claim  has  been  expressed  at  so  many  times,  and  in  so  many  forms,  that  a  repetition  of 
that  opinion  is  not  necessary.  But  the  subject  is  a  subject  in  dispute.  The  Government 
has  agreed  to  make  it  a  matter  of  reference  and  arbitration;  and  it  must  fulfil  that  agree- 
ment, unless  anotlier  mode  of  settling  the  controversy  should  be  resorted  to  witli  the 
hope  of  producing  a  speedier  decision.  The  President  proposes,  then,  that  the  Govern- 
ments  of  Maine  and  Massachusetts  should  severally  appoint  a  commissioner  or  commis- 
sioners,  empowered  to  confer  with  the  authorities  of  this  Government  upon  a  conven- 
tioiial  line,  or  line  by  agreement,  with  its  terms,  conditions,  considerations,  and  equiva- 
lents, with  an  understanding  that  no  such  line  will  be  agreed  upon,  without  the  assent  of 
such  commissioners. 

"This  mode  of  proceeding,  or  some  other  which  shall  express  assent  beforehand, 
seems  indispensable,  if  any  negotiation  for  a  conventional  line  is  to  be  had;  since,  if  hap- 
pily a  treaty  should  be  the  result  of  the  negotiation,  it  can  only  be  submitted  to  the  Se- 
nate of  the  United  States  for  ratification." 

A  similar  letter  was  addressed  to  the  Governor  of  Massachusetts. 
The  Governor  of  Maine, now  an  honorable  member  of  this  House, 
immediately  convoked  the  legislature  of  Maine,  by  proclamation. 


Appendix  I. 


t  Appendix  II. 


I  Appendix  III. 


22 

In  MnsaacliuseUs,  the  probable  exigency  had  been  anticipated,  niid 
the  legislature  had  authorized  the  Governor,  now  my  honorable  col- 
league here,  to  appoint  comn)i!>sioner8  on  behalf  of  the  Common- 
wealth. The  legislature  of  Maine  adopted  resoluliona  to  the  same 
effect,  and  duly  elected  four  commissioners  from  among  the  most 
eminent  persons  in  (he  State,  of  all  parlies;  and  their  unanimous  con- 
sent to  any  proposed  line  of  boundary  was  made  indispensable. 
Three  distinguished  public  men,  known  to  all  parlies,  and  having  the 
•confidence  of  all  parties,  in  any  question  of  this  kind,  were  appoint- 
•cd  commissioners  by  the  Governor  of  Massachusetts. 

Now,  sir,  1  ask,  could  any  thing  have  been  devised  fairer,  safer, 
and  betfer  for  all  parlies  ihan  this?  The  States  were  here,  by  their 
commissioners;  Great  Brilain  was  here,  by  her  special  minister,  and 
the  Canadian  and  New  Brunswick  authorities  within  reach  of  the 
means  of  consvdtation;  and  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
Avas  ready  to  proceed  with  (he  important  duties  it  had  assumed.  Sir, 
I  put  the  question  to  any  man  of  sense,  whether,  supposing  the  real 
object  to  be  a  fair,  just,  convenient,  prompt  settlement  of  the  boun- 
•dary  di8pu(e,  (his  9(ate  of  things  was  not  more  promising  than  all 
the  schemes  of  exploration  and  arbitration,  and  all  the  tissue  of  pro- 
jects and  counter  projects,  with  which  the  two  Governments  had 
been  making  themselves  strenuously  idle  for  so  many  years  ?  Nor  was 
the  promise  not  fultilled. 

It  has  been  said ,  absurdly  enough ,  that  Maine  was  coerced  into  a  con- 
sentto  this  line  of  boundary.  What  was  the  coercion?  Where  was  the 
coercion?  On  the  one  hand,  she  saw  an  immediate  and  reasonable 
settlement;  on  the  other  hand,  a  proceeding  sure  to  be  long,  and  its 
result  seen  to  be  doubtful.  Sir,  the  coercion  was  none  other  than 
the  coercion  of  duty,  good  spn=e,  nnd  manifest  interest.  The  right 
and  the  expedient  united,  to  compel  her  to  give  up  the  wrong,  the 
useless,  the  inexpedient. 

Maine  was  asked  to  judge  for  herself,  to  decide  on  her  own  inte- 
rests, not  unmindful,  nevertheless,  of  those  patriotic  considerations 
which  should  lead  her  to  regard  the  peace  an^  prosperity  of  the  whole 
country.  Maine,  it  has  been  said,  was  persuaded  to  part  with  a 
portion  of  territory  by  this  agreement.  Persuaded  !  Why,  sir,  she 
was  invited  here  to  make  a  compromise — to  give  and  to  take— to  sur- 
render territory  of  very  little  value  for  equivident  advantages,  of  which 


23 


advantages  she  was  herself  to  be  the  uncontrolled  judge.  Her  commis- 
sioners needed  no  guardians.  They  knew  her  interest.  They  knew 
what  they  were  called  on  to  part  with ,  and  the  value  of  what  they  could 
obtain  in  exchange.  They  knew  especially  that  on  one  hand  was  im- 
mediate settlement,  on  the  other,  ten  or  fifteen  years  more  of  delay  and 
vexation.  Sir,  the  piteous  tears  shed  for  Maine,  in  this  respect,  are 
not  her  own  tears.  They  arc  the  crocodile  tears  of  pretended  friend- 
ship and  party  scutimentality.  Lamentations  and  griefs  have  been 
uttered  in  this  Capitol  about  the  losses  and  sacrifices  <>f  Maine,  which 
nine-tenths  of  the  people  of  Maine  laugh  at,  Nine-fonthn  of  her 
people,  to  this  day,  heartily  appiove  the  treaty.  It  is  my  full  belief 
that  there  are  not,  at  this  moment,  fifty  respeclable  persona  in  Maine 
who  would  now  wish  to  see  the  'reaty  annulled,  and  the  State  re- 
placed in  the  condition  in  which  it  was,  with  Mr.  Van  Buren's  arbi- 
tration before  it.  and  inevitably  fixed  upon  it,  by  the  {flighted  faith  of 
this  Government,  on  the  4th  of  March,  1841. 

Sir,  the  occasion  called  for  the  revision  of  a  very  long  line  of  boun- 
dary; and  what  complicated  the  case,  and  rendered  it  more  difficult, 
was,  that  the  territory  on  the  side  of  the  United  States  belonged  to  uo 
less  than  four  difFerent  States.  The  establishment  of  the  boundary 
was  to  afi'ect  Maine,  New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  and  New  York. 
All  these  Stales  were  to  be  satisfied,  if  properly  they  could  be.  Maine, 
it  is  true,  was  principally  concerned.  Bui  she  did  not  expect  to  re- 
tain all  that  she  called  her  own,  and  yet  get  more;  and  still  call  it 
compromise,  and  an  exchange  of  equivalents.  She  was  not  so  ab- 
surd. I  regret  some  things  which  occurred;  particularly  that  while 
the  commissioners  of  Maine  assented,  unanimously,  to  the  bodndary 
proposed,  on  the  equivalents  proposed,  yet,  in  the  paper  in  which 
they  express  that  assent,  they  seem  to  argue  against  the  act  which 
Ihey  were  about  to  perform.  This,  I  think,  was  a  mistake.  It 
had  an  awkward  appearance,  and  probably  gave  rise  to  whatever  of 
dissatisfaction  has  been  expressed  in  any  quarter. 

And  now,  sir,  I  am  prepared  to  ask  whether  the  proceeding 
adopted,  that  is,  an  attempt  to  settle  this  long  controversy,  by  the  as- 
sent of  the  States  concerned,  was  not  wise  and  discreet,  under  the 
circumstances  of  the  case?  Sir,  the  attempt  succeeded ,  and  it  put  an 
•end  to  a  controversy  which  had  subsisted,  with  no  little  inconvenience 
to  the  country,  and  danger  to  its  peace, through  every  administration, 


24 

from  that  of  General  Washington  to  that  of  Mr.  Van  Buren.  It  is 
due  to  truth,  and  to  the  occasion,  to  say,  that  there  were  difficulties 
and  obstacles  in  the  way  of  this  settlement,  which  had  not  been  over- 
come under  the  administration  of  Washington,  or  the  elder  Adams, 
or  Mr.  Jefrerson,orMr.Madison,or  Mr.Monroe,orMr.  J.  Q.  Adams,' 
or  GeneralJackson,  or  Mr.  Van  Buren.  In  1842,  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  Mr.  Tyler,  the  dispute  was  settled,  and  settled  satisfactorily. 
Sir,  whatever  may  be  said  to  the  contrary,  Mainp  was  no  loser,  but 
an  evident  gainer,  by  this  adjustment  of  boundary.  She  parted  with 
some  portion  of  territory;  this  I  would  not  undervalue,  but  certainly 
most  of  it  was  quite  worthless.  Capt.  Talcot's  report,  and  other  evi- 
dence, sufficiently  establish  that  fact.* 

Maine  having,  by  her  own  free  consent,  agreed  to  part  with  this 
portion  of  territory,  received,  in  the  first  place,  from  the  Treas- 
ury of  the  United  States,  $150 ,000,  for  her  half  of  the  land,  a 
sum  which  I  suppose  to  be  much  greater  than  she  would  have  re- 
alized from  the  sale  of  it  in  fifty  years.  No  person,  well  informed 
on  the  subject,  can  doubt  this. 

In  the  next  place,  the  United  States  Government  paid  her  for  the 
expenses  of  her  civil  posse  to  defend  the  State,  and  also  for  the  sur- 
veys. On  this  account  she  has  already  received  $200,000 ,  and  hopes 
to  receive  80  or  100,000  dollars  more.  If  this  hope  shall  be  realized ,. 
she  will  have  received  !ijs450,000  in  cash. 

But  Maine  I  admit  did  not  look,  and  ought  not  to  have  looked,  to 
the;reaty  as  a  mere  pecuniary  bargain.     She  looked  at  other  things, 
besides  money.     She  took  into  consideration  that  she  was  to  enjoy 
the  free  navigation  of  the  river  St.  John's.     I  thought  this  a  great 
object  at  the  time  the  treaty  was  made;  but  I  had  then  no  adequate 
conception  of  its  real  importance.     Circumstances  which  have  since 
taken  place  show  that  its  advantages  to  the  State  are  far  greater  than 
1  then  supposed.     That  river  is  to  be  free  to  the  citizens  of  Maine 
for  the  transportation  down  its  stream  of  all  unmanufactured  articles 
whatever.     Now,  what  is  this  river  St.  John's?     We  have  heard  a 
vast  deal  lately  of  the  immense  value  and  importance  of  the  river 
Columbia  and  its  navigation;  but  I  will  undertake  tosay  that,  for  all  pur- 
poses of  hunian  use ,  the  St.  John's  is  worth  a  hundred  times  as  much. 


*Appcndix  IV. 


25 


>    \   ♦ 


as  the  Columbia  is,  or  ever  will  be.  In  point  of  magnitude,  it  is  one  of 
the  most  respectable  rivers  on  the  eastern  side  of  this  part  of  America. 
It  is  longer  than  the  Hudson,  and  as  large  as  the  Delaware.  And, 
moreover,  it  is  a  river  which  has  a  mouth  to  it,  and  that,  in  the  opin- 
ion of  the  member  from  Arkansas,  (Mr.  Sevier,)  is  a  thing  of  some 
importance  in  the  matter  of  rivers.  [A  laugh.]  It  is  navigable  from 
the  sea,  and  by  steamboats,  to  a  greater  distance  than  the  Columbia, 
it  runs  through  a  good  country,  and  its  sources  afl'ord  a  communica- 
tion with  the  Aroostook  valley.  And  I  will  leave  it  to  the  Member 
from  Maine  to  say  whether  that  valley  is  not  one  of  the  finest  and 
most  fertile  parts  of  the  State.  And  I  will  leave  it  not  only  to  him, 
but  to  any  man  at  all  acquainted  with  the  facts,  whether  this  free 
navigation  of  Hie  St.  John's  has  not,  at  once,  greatly  raised  the  value 
of  the  lands  on  Fish  river,  on  the  AUegash,  Madawasca,  and  the 
St.  Francis.  That  whole  region  has  no  other  outlet,  and  the  value 
of  the  lumber  which  has,  during  this  very  year,  been  floated  down 
that  river,  is  far  greater  than  that  of  all  the  furs  which  have  descended 
from  Fort  Vancouvre  to  the  Pacific.  On  this  subject  I  am  enabled 
to  speak  with  authority,  for  it  has  so  happened  that,  since  the  last 
adjournment  of  the  Senate,  I  have  looked  at  an  official  return  of  the 
Hudson's  Bay  Company ,  showing  the  actual  extent  of  the  fur  trade  in 
Oregon,  and  I  find  it  to  be  much  less  than  I  had  supposed.  An  in- 
telligent gentleman  from  Missouri  estimated  the  value  of  that  trade, 
on  the  west  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  at  three  hundred  thousand  dol- 
lars annually; but  I  find  it  stated  in  the  last  publication  by  Mr.  Mc- 
Gregor, of  the  board  of  trade  in  England,  (a  very  accurate  authority,) 
that  the  receipts  of  the  Hudson's  Bay  Company  for  furs  west  of  the 
Rocky  Mountains,  in  1828,  is  placed  at  $138,000.  1  do  not  know,, 
though  the  member  from  Missouri  is  lively  to  know,  whether  all  these 
furs  are  brought  to  Fort  Vancouvre;  or  whether  some  of  them  are 
not  sent  through  the  passes  in  the  mountains  to  Hudson's  Bay;  or  to 
Montreal,  by  the  way  of  the  north  shore  of  Lake  Superior.  I  sup- 
pose this  last  to  be  the  case.  It  is  stated,  however,  by  the  same  au- 
thority, that  the  amount  of  goods  received  at  Vancouvre,  and  disposed 
of  in  payment  for  furs,  is  ,'120,000,  annually,  and  no  more. 

Now,  sir,  this  right  to  carry  lumber,  and  grain,  and  cattle  to  the 
mouth  of  the  river  St.  John's,  on  equal  terms  with  the  British,  is  a 
matter  of  great  impoitonce ;  it  brings  lands  lying  on  its  upper 
branchcir,  fur  in  the  interior,  into  direct  counnunicution  with  the  sca> 


26 


Those  lands  are  valuable  for  timber  now,  and  a  portion  of  them  are 
the  best  in  the  Slate  for  agriculture.  The  fact  has  been  stated  to  me, 
on  the  best  authority,  that  in  the  Aroostook  valley  land  is  to  be  found 
which  has  yielded  more  than  forty  bushels  of  wheat  to  the  acre,  even 
under  the  common  cultivation  of  new  countries.  1  must,  therefore, 
think  that  the  commissioners  from  Maine  were  quite  right  in  believing 
that  this  was  an  important  acquisition  for  their  State,  and  one  worth 
the  'nurender  of  some  acres  of  barren  mountains  and  impenetrable 
swamps. 

But,  Mr.  President,  there  is  another  class  of  objections  to  this  treaty 
boundary,  on  which  I  wish  to  submit  a  few  remarks.  It  has  beeji 
alleged,  that  the  treaty  of  Washington  ceded  very  important  military 
advantages  on  this  continent  to  the  British  Government.  One  of 
these  is  said  to  be  9,  military  road  between  the  two  provinces  of  New 
Brunswick  and  Lower  Canada;  and  the  other  is  the  possession  of  cer- 
tain heights,  well  adapted,  as  is  alleged, to  military  defence.  I  think 
tne  honorable  member  from  N.  Y.,  farthest  from  the  chair,  (Mr. 
Dix,)  said,  that  by  the  treaty  of  Washington,  a  military  road  was 
surrendered  to  England,  which  she  considered  as  of  vital  importance 
to  her  possessions  in  America. 

Mr.  Dix  rose  to  explain.  He  had  not  spoken  of  a  "military  road,'' 
but  of  a  portion  of  territory  affording  a  means  of  military  communi- 
cation between  two  of  her  provinces. 

Mr.  W.  Well,  it  is  the  same  thing,  and  we  will  ^ee  how  that  mat- 
ter stands.  The  honorable  member  says,  that  he  .said  a  means  of 
military  communication,  and  not  a  military  road.  I  am  not  a  mili- 
tary man,  and  therefore  may  not  so  clearly  comprehend,  as  that  mem- 
ber does,  the  difference  between  a  military  road  and  a  means  of  mil- 
itary communication,  [a  laugh;]  bur  I  will  read  from  the  honorable 
member's  speech,  which  1  have  before  me,  understood  to  have  been 
revised  by  himself.     The  honorable  member  says: 

"The  settlement  of  the  northeastern  boundary— one  of  the  most  delicate  and  difficult 
that  has  ever  arisen  between  us— affords  a  stiikin;^  evidence  of  our  desire  to  maintain 
witii  her  the  most  friendly  understanding.  We  ceded  to  her  a  portion  of  territory  which 
she  deemed  of  vital  importance  as  a  means  of  miUtary  communication  between  the  Can- 
adas  and  lier  Atlantic,  provinces,  and  which  will  give  her  a  great  advantage  in  a  contest 
with  us.  The  measure  was  sustained  by  the  constituted  .authorities  of  the  country,  and 
I  liave  no  desire  or  intention  to  call  its  wisdom  in  question.  But  it  prove.s  that  we  were 
not  unwilling  to  afford  Great  Britain  any  facility  she  required  for  consolidating  her  North 
Auiti'lcan  posscs.iions — acting  in  peace  as  f'luugVi  war  w.is  not  to  be  expecleJ  between 


»» 


2T 


the  two  countries.  If  we  had  cherished  any  ambitio^  designs  in  respect  to  them — if 
we  had  had  any  other  wish  than  that  of  continuing  cm  terms  of  amity  with  her  and 
them — this  great  military  advantage  would  never  have  been  conceded  to  her. 

"On  the  other  hand,  I  regret  to  say,  that  her  course  towards  us  has  been  a  course  of 
perpetual  encroachment.  But,  sir,  I  will  not  look  back  upon  what  is  past  for  the  purpose 
cf  reviving  disturbing  recollections." 

I  should  be  very  glad  if  the  honorable  gentleman  would  show  how 
England  derives  so  highly  important  benefits  from  the  treaty,  in  a 
military  point  of  view,  or  what  proof  there  is  that  she  so  considers 
the  matter. 

Mr.  Dix  said  that  this  treaty  had  been  proclaimet'.  by  the  President 
in  the  latter  part  of  the  year  1842.  Mr.  D.  had,  at  that  time,  left 
the  country.  The  injunction  of  secrecy  bad  been  removed  from  the 
proceedings  of  the  Senate  in  regard  to  the  ratification.  Although 
temporarily  absent  from  the.country,  Mr.  D.  had  not  lost  sight  of  the 
state  of  things  at  home.  He  read  with  interest  the  debates  in  the 
British  House  of  Parliament  in  regard  to  the  treaty,  and  he  was 
struck  with  the  fact,  (and  the  debates  would  bear  him  out  in  the 
statement,)  that  distinguished  public  men  deemed  the  acquisition 
of  territory  which  had  been  gained,  to  be  one  of  vital  importance  as 
a  means  of  connexion  and  communication  between  their  provinces 
in  America.  As  to  a  military  road,  he  had  never  traced  its  course 
upon  the  map;  but  he  believed  that  it  passed  along  the  east  bank  of 
the  St.  John's  until  that  river  turned  westward,  and  then  along  its 
north  bank  toward  Quebec.  But  by  the  award  of  the  King  of  Hol- 
land, the  road  would  have  had  to  run  quite  round  the  head  of  the 
river  St.  Francis.  By  that  award,  our  boundary  was  to  pass  over 
the  range  of  highlands,  far  to  the  north,  and  near  the  St.  Lawrence 
river.  But  by  the  treaty  of  Washington,  the  line  leaves  those  heights, 
and  was  so  thrown  back  as  to  pass  several  miles  farther  to  the  east- 
%vard.  He  had  some  notes  here  of  the  debates  in  Parliament,  and  as 
the  gentleman  had  called  upon  him  for  his  proof,  Mr.  D.  would 
read  a  few  extracts.  Here  Mr.  Dix  read  sundry  extracts  from  de- 
bates in  the  House  of  Conmions,  and  said  he  thought  they  sustained 
his  position.  But  he  desired  to  say,  that  he  had  raised  no  question 
touching  the  wisdom  of  the  provisions  of  the  treaty,  or  made  any 
reflections  either  on  those  who  negot^ited  the  treaty,  nor  on  those  who 
ratified  it. 

Mr.  W.  proceeded.     The  passages  which  the  lionorable  member 


28 


lias  read,  however  pertinent  they  may  be  to  another  question,  do  not 
touch  the  question  immediately  before  us.  I  understand, quite  well, 
what  was  said  of  the  heights;  but  nobody,  so  far  as  I  know,  ever 
spoke  of  this  supposed  military  road  or  military  communication,  as  of 
any  importance  at  all,  unless  it  be  in  a  remark,  not  very  intelligible, 
in  an  article  ascribed  to  Lord  Pahnerston.  , 

I  was  induced  to  refer  to  this  subject,  sir,  by  a  circumstance  which 
I  have  not  long  been  apprised  of.  Lord  Palmerston  (if  he  be  the  au- 
thor of  certain  publications  ascribed  to  him)  says  that  all  the  impor- 
tant points  were  given  up  by  Lord  Ashburton  to  the  United  States. 
I  might  here  state,  too,  that  Lord  Palmerston  called  the  whole  treaty 
"the  Ashburton  capitulation,"  declaring  that  it  yielded  everything 
that  was  of  importance  to  Great  Britain,  and  that  all  its  stipulations 
were  to  the  advantage  of  the  United  States,  and  to  the  sacrifice  of  the 
interests  of  England.  But  it  is  not  on  such  general  statements,  and 
such  unjust  statements,  nor  on  any  oft-hand  expressions  used  in  de- 
bate, though  in  the  roundest  terms,  that  this  question  must  turn.  He 
speaks  of  this  mihtary  road,  but  he  entirely  misplaces  it.  The  road 
which  runs  from  New  Brunswick  to  Canada  follows  the  north  side  of 
the  St.  John's  to  the  mouth  of  the  Madawasca,  and  then  turning 
northwest,  follows  that  stream  to  Lake  Tamariscotta,and  thence  pro- 
ceeds over  a  depressed  part  of  the  highlands  till  it  strikes  the  St.  Law- 
rence one  hundred  and  seventeen  miles  below  Quebec.  This  is  the 
road  which  has  been  always  used,  and  there  is  no  other. 

I  admit,  it  is  very  convenient  for  the  British  Government  to  pos- 
sess territory  through  which  they  may  enjoy  a  road  j  it  is  of  great 
value  as  an  avenue  of  communication  in  time  of  peace;  but,  as  a 
mihtary  commnication,  it  is  of  no  value  at  all.  What  business  can 
an  army  ever  have  there?  Besides,  it  is  no  gorge,  no  pass,  no  nar- 
row defile,  to  be  defended  by  a  fort.  If  a  fort  should  be  built  there 
an  army  could,  at  pleasure,  make  a  detour  so  as  to  keep  out  of  the 
reach  of  its  guns.  It  is  very  useful,  I  admit,  in  time  of  peace.  But 
does  not  every  body  know,  military  man  or  not,  that  unless  there  is 
a  defile,  or  some  narrow  place  through  which  troops  must  pass,  and 
which  a  fortification  will  command,  that  a  mere  open  road  must,  in 
time  of  war,  be  in  the  power  of  tlie  strongest?  If  we  retained  the 
road  by  treaty,  and  war  came,  would  not  the  English  take  possession 
of  it  if  they  could?  Would  they  be  restrained  by  a  regard  to  the 
Treaty  of  Washington?     I  have  never  yet  heard  a  reason  adtUiced 


■*j^4a»«^-"i 


>• 


29 


■^iwnr^*'   ' 


>• 


why  this  communication  should  be  regarded  as  tlie  slightest  possible 
advantage  in  a  military  point  of  view. 

But  the  circumstance,  which  1  have  not  long  known,  is,  that, 
by  a  map  published  with  the  speech  of  '.he  honorable  member  from 
Missouri,  made  in  the  Senate,  on  the  question  of  ratifying  the  treaty, 
this  well  known  and  long  used  road  is  laid  down ,  probably  from  the 
same  source  of  error  which  misled  Lord  Palmerston ,  as  following  the 
St.  John's,  on  its  south  side,  to  the  mouth  of  the  St.  Francis;  thence 
along  that  river  to  its  source,  and  thence,  by  a  single  bound, over  the 
highlands,  to  the  St.  Lawrence,  near  Q,uebec.  This  is  all  imagi- 
nation. It  is  called  the  ^'Valley  Road."  Valley  Road,  indeed! 
Why,  sir,  it  is  represented  as  running  over  the  very  ridge  of  the  most 
inaccessible  part  of  the  highlands!  It  is  made  to  cross  abrupt  and 
broken  precipices  2,000  feet  high!  It  is,  at  different  points  of  its 
imaginary  course,  from  fifty  to  a  hundred  miles  distant  from  the  real 
road.  So  much,  Mr,  President,  for  the  great  boon  of  military  com- 
munication conceded  to  England.  It  is  nothing  more  nor  less  than 
a  common  road ,  along  s' reams  and  lakes,  and  over  a  country,  in  great 
part  rather  flat.  It  then  passes  the  heights  to  the  St.  Lawrence.  If 
war  breaks  out  we  shall  take  it,  if  we  can,  and  if  we  need  it,  of  which 
there  is  not  the  slierhtest  probability.  It  will  never  be  protected  by- 
fortifications,  and  never  can  be.  It  will  be  just  as  easy  to  take  it  from 
England,  in  case  of  war,  as  it  would  be  to  keep  possession  of  it,  if  it 
were  our  own. 

In  regard  to  the  defence  of  the  heights,  I  shall  dispose  of  that  sub- 
ject in  a  few  words.  There  is  a  ridge  of  highlands  which  does  ap- 
proach the  river  St.  Lawrence,  although  it  is  not  true  that  they  over- 
look Quebec;  on  the  contrary,  the  ridge  is  at  the  distance  of  thirty 
or  forty  miles. 

It  is  very  natural  that  military  men  in  England,  or  indeed  in 
any  part  of  Europe,  should  have  attached  great  importance  to  these 
mountains.  The  great  military  authority  of  England — perhaps  the 
highest  living  military  authority— bad  served  in  India  and  on  the 
European  continent,  aiid  it  was  natural  enough  that  he  should 
apply  Europea'n  ideas  of  military  defences  to  America.  But  they 
are  quite  inapplicable.  Highlands  such  as  these  were  not  ordina- 
rily found  on  the  great  batde  fields  of  Europe.  They  are  nei- 
ther Alps  nor  Pyrenees;  ihey  have  no  passes  through  them;  nor 


30 


roads  over  them,  and  never  will  have.  Then  there  was  another 
reasori.  In  1839  an  ex  parte  survey  was  made,  as  I  have  said,  by 
Captain  Mudge  and  Mr.  Featherstonhaugh ,  if  survey  it  could  be 
called,  of  the  region  in  the  north  of  Maine,  for  the  use  of  the  British 
Government.  I  dar^  say  Mr.  Mudge  is  an  intelligent  and  respectable 
officerj  how  much  personal  attention  he  gave  the  subject  I  do  not 
know.  As  to  Mr.  Featherstonhaugh,  he  has  been  in  our  service, 
and  his  authority  is  not  worth  a  straw.  These  two  persons  made  a 
report,  containing  this  very  singular  statement:  That,  in  the  ridge  of 
highlands  nearest  to  the  St.  Lawrence,  there  was  a  great  hiatus  in 
one  particular  place,  a  gap  of  thirty  or  forty  miles,  in  which  the  ele- 
vation did  not  exceed  fifty  feet.  This  was  certainly  the  strangest  state- 
ment that  ever  was  made.  Their  whole  report  gave  but  one  measure- 
ment by  the  barometer ,  and  that  measurement  stated  the  height  of  twelve 
hundred  feet.  A  survey  and  map  were  made  the  following  year  by 
our  own  commissioners,  Messrs.  Graham  and  Talcot,  of  the  Topo- 
graphical Corps,  and  Professor  Renwick,  of  Columbia  College^ 
On  this  map,  the  very  spot  where  this  gap  was  said  to  be  situated  is 
dotted  over  thickly  with  figures,  showing  heights  varying  from  1,200 
to  2,000  feet,  and  forming  one  rough  and  lofty  ridge,  marked  by  ab- 
rupt and  almost  perpendicular  precipices.  When  this  map  and  re- 
port of  Messrs.  Mudge  and  Featherstonhaugh  was  sent  to  England, 
the  British  authorities  saw  that  this  alleged  gap  was  laid  down  as 
an  indefensible  point,  and  it  was  probably  on  that  ground  alone  that 
they  desired  a  line  east  of  that  ridge,  in  order  that  they  might  guard 
against  access  of  a  hostile  power  from  the  United  States.  But  in 
truth  there  is  no  such  gap,  not  at  all;  our  engineers  proved  this,  and 
we  quite  well  understood  it  when  agreeing  to  the  boundary.  Any 
man  of  common  sense,  military  or  not,  must,  therefore,  now  see 
that  nothing  can  be  more  imaginary  or  unfounded  than  the  idea  that 
any  importance  could  attach  to  the  possession  of  these  heights. 

Sir,  there  are  two  old  and  well  known  roads  to  Canada.  One  by 
way  of  Lake  Champlain  and  the  Richelieu,  to  Montreal.  This 
is  the  route  which  armies  have  traversed  so  often,  in  different 
periods  of  our  history.  The  other  leads  from  the  Kennebeck 
river  to  the  sources  of  the  Chaudiere  and  the  Du  Loup,  and 
so  to  Quebec.  This  last  was  the  track  of  Arnold's  march.  East 
of  this,  there  is  no  practicable  communication  for  troops  between 
Maine  and  Canada j  till  we  get  to  the  Madawasca.     We  had  be- 


-r 


31 


»    y 


fore  U3  a  report  from  G«n.  Wool,  while  this  treaty  was  in  negotia- 
tion, in  which  that  intelligent  officer  declares,  that  it  is  perfectly  idle 
to  think  of  fortifying  any  point  east  of  this  road.  It  is  a  moun>ain 
region ,  through  which  no  army  can  possibly  pass  into  Canada.  And, 
sir,  this  avenue  to  Canada,  this  praclicable  avenue,  and  only  practi- 
cable avenue  east  of  that  by  way  of  Lake  Champlain,  is  left  now 
just  as  it  was  found  by  the  treaty.  The  treaty  does  not  touch  it, 
nor  in  any  manner  affect  it  at  all. 

But  I  must  go  farther.  I  said  that  the  Treaty  of  Washington  was 
a  treaty  of  equivalents,  in  which  it  was  expected  that  each  party 
should  give  something  and  receive  something.  And  I  am  now  wil- 
ling to  meet  any  gentleman,  be  he  a  military  man  or  not,  who  will 
make  the  assertion  that,  in  a  military  point  of  view,  the  greatest  ad- 
vantages derived  from  that  treaty  were  on  the  side  of  Great  Britain, 
It  was  on  this  point  that  I  wished  to  say  something  in  reply  to  an 
honorable  member  from  New  York,  (Mr.  Dickinson,)  who  will 
have  it  that  in  this  treaty,  England  supposes  that  she  got  the  advan- 
tage of  us.  Sir,  I  do  not  think  the  military  advantages  she  obtained  by 
it  are  worth  a  rush.  But  even  if  they  were — if  she  had  obtained  ad- 
vantages of  the  greatest  value — would  it  not  have  been  fair  in  the 
member  from  New  York  to  state,  nevertheless,  whether  there  were 
not  equivalent  military  advantages  obtained ,  on  our  side,  in  other  parts 
of  the  line?  Would  it  not  have  been  candid  and  proper  in  him, 
when  adverting  to  the  military  advantage  obtained  by  Kugland,  in  a 
communication  between  New  Brunswick  and  Canada,  if  such  advan- 
tages there  were,  to  have  stated,  on  the  other  hand,  and  at  the  same 
time,  the  regaining  by  us  of  Rouse's  Point,  at  the  outlet  of  Lake 
Champlain? — an  advantage  which  overbalanced  all  others,  forty 
times  told.  I  must  be  allowed  to  say,  that  I  certainly  never  expect- 
ed that  a  member  from  New  York,  above  all  other  men,  should  speak 
of  this  treaty  as  conferring  military  advantages  on  Great  Britain,  with- 
out full  eq(^valents.  I  listened  to  it,  I  confejjs,  with  utter  astonish- 
ment. A  distinguished  member  from  that  State,  (Mr.  Wright,) 
saw,  at  the  time,  very  clearly  the  advantage  gained  by  this  treaty  to 
the  United  States  and  to  New  York.  He  voted  willingly  for  its  rati- 
fication, and  he  never  will  say  that  Great  Britain  obtained  a  balance 
of  advantages  in  a  military  point  of  view. 

Why,  how  is  the  State  of  New  York  affected  by  this  treaty?  Sir,  is 


I 


32 

not  Rouse's  Point  perfectly  well  known, and  admitted, by  every  mili- 
tary man,  to  be  the  key  of  Lake  Champlain?     It  commands  every 
vessel  passing  up  or  down  the  lake,  between  New  York  and  Can- 
ada.    It  had  always  been  supposed  that  this  point  lay  some  dis- 
tance south  of  the  parallel  of  45,  which  was  our  boundary  line 
with   Cp-,ada,  and ,  therefore ,  was  within  the  United  States;  and, 
under  this  supposition,  the  United  Siates  purchased  the  land,  and 
commenced  the  erection  of  a  strong  fortress.  But  a  more  accurate  sur- 
vey having  been  made  in  1818,  by  astronomers  on  both  sides,  it  was 
found  that  the  parallel  of  45  ran  south  of  this  fortress,  and  thus 
Rouse's  Point,  with  the  fort  upon  it,  was  found  to  be  in  the  British 
dominions.     This  discovery  created,  as  well  it  might,  a  great  sensa- 
tion here.     None  knows  this  tjetter  than  the  honorable  member  from 
South  Carolina,  (Mr.  Calhoun,)  who  was  then  at  the  head  of  the 
Department  of  War.     As  Rouse's  Point  was  no  longer  ours,  we  sent 
our  engineers  to  examine  the  shores  of  the  lake,  to  find  some  other 
place  or  places  which  we  might  fortify.     They  made  a  report,  on 
their  return,  saying,  that  there  were  two  other  points,  some  distance 
south  of  Rouse's  Point,  one  called  Windmill  Point,  on  the  east  side 
of  tlie  lake,  and  the  other  called  Sloney  Point,  on  the  west  side, 
which  it  became  necessary  now  to  fortify,  and  they  gave  an  estimate 
of  the  probable  expense.    When  this  treaty  was  in  process  of  negotia- 
tion, we  called  for  the  opinion  of  military  men  respecting  the  value  of 
Rouse's  Point,  in  order  to  see  whether  it  was  highly  desirable  to  ob- 
tain it.     We  had  their  report  before  us,  in  which  it  was  stated,  that 
the  natural  and  best  point  for  the  defence  of  the  outlet  of  Lake 
Champlain  was  Rouse's  Point.     In  fact,  any  body  might  see  that 
this  was  the  case  who  would  look  at  the  map.     The  point  projects 
into  the  narrowest  passage  by  which  the  waters  of  the  lake  pass  into 
the  Richelieu.     Any  vessel,  passing  into  or  out  of  the  lake,  must 
come  within  point  blank  range  of  the  guns  of  a  fortress  erected  on 
this  point;  and  it  ran  out  so  far  that  any  such  vessel  mj^t  approach 
the  fort,  head  on,  for  several  miles,  so  as  to  be  exposed  to  a  raking 
iire  from  the  battery,  before  she  could  possibly  bring  her  broadside 
to  bear  upon  the  fort  at  all.     It  was  very  different  with  the  points 
farther  south.    Between  them  the  passage  was  much  wider;  so  much 
so,  indeed,  that  a  vessel  might  pass  directly  between  the  two,  and  not 
be  in  reach  of  point  blank  shot  from  either. 


33 

Mr.  Dickinson,  of  New  York,  here  interposed  to  ask  a  question. 
Did  not  the  Dutch  line  give  us  Rouse's  Point  ? 

Mr.  W.  Certainly  not.  It  gave  us  a  little  semi-circular  line,  run- 
ning round  the  fort,  but  not  including  what  we  had  possessed  before. 
And  besides,  we  had  rejected  the  Dutch  line,  and  the  whole  point 
now  clearly  belonged  to  England.  It  was  all  within  the  British  terri- 
tory.   Does  the  gentleman  uuderstand  me  now? 

Mr,  Dickinson.  Oh  yes,  I  understand  you  now,  and  I  under- 
stood you  before. 

Mr.  W.    I  am  glad  he  does.     [A  laugh.]     I  was  saying  that  a 
vessel  might  pass  between  the  two  points,  Windmill  point  and  Stony 
point,  and  escape  point  blancshot  from  either.  Meanwhile  her  broad- 
side could  be  brought  to  bear  upon  either  of  them.     The  forts  would 
be  entirely  independent  of  each  other,  and,  having  no  communi- 
cation, could  not  render  each  other  the  least  assistance  in  case  of 
attack      But  the  militaiy  men  told  us,  there  was  no  sort  of  ques- 
tion, that  Rouse's  Point  was  extremely  desirable  as  a  point  of  mil- 
itary defence.     This  is  plain  enough,  and  I  need  not  spend  time  to 
prove  it.     Of  one  thing  I  am  certain,  that  the  true  road  to  Canada 
is  by  the  way  of  Lake  Champlain.     That  is  the  old  path.     I  take  to 
myself  the  credit  of  having  said  here,  thirty  years  ago,  speaking  of 
the  mode  of  taking  Canada,  that  when  an  American  woodsman  un- 
dertakes to  fell  a  tree,  he  does  not  begin  by  lopping  off  the  branches, 
but  strikes  his  axe  at  once  into  the  trunk.     The  trunk,  in  relation  to 
Canada,  is  Montreal,  and  the  river  St.  Lawrence  down  to  Quebec; 
and  so  we  found  in  the  last  war.     It  is  not  my  purpose  to  scan  the 
propriety  of  military  measures  then  adopted ,  but  I  suppose  it  to 
have  been  rather  accidental  and  unfortunate, that  we  began  the  attack 
in  Upper  Canada.  It  would  have  been  better  military  policy,  as  I  sup- 
pose, to  have  pushed  our  whole  force  by  the  way  of  Lake  Champlain, 
and  made  a  direct  movement  on  Montreal;  anc,  though  we  might 
thereby  have  lost  the  glories  of  the  battles  of  the  Thames,  and  of 
Lundy's  Lane,  and  of  the  Sortie  from  Fort  Erie,  yet  we  should 
have  won  other  laurels  of  equal,  and  perhaps  greater,  value  at  Mon- 
treal.     Once  successful    in    this  movement,  the  whole  country 
above  would  have  fallen  into  our  power.     Is  not  this  evident  to  every 
gentleman  ?    Now  Rouse's  Point  is  the  best  means  of  defending  both 
the  ingress  into  the  lake,  and  the  exit  from  it.     And  1  say  now,  (hat 
3 


I 


1    ! 
if    i 


34 

on  the  whole  frontier  of  the  State  of  New  York,  with  the  single 
exception  of  the  narrows  below  the  city,  there  is  not  a  point  of  equal 
importance.  I  hope  this  Government  will  last  forevei ,  but  if  it  does 
not,  and  if,  in  the  judgment  of  Heaven,  so  great  a  calamity  shall  be- 
fal  us  as  the  rupture  of  this  Union ,  and  the  State  of  New  York  shall 
thereby  be  thrown  upon  her  own  defences,  I  ask  is  there  a  single 
point,  except  the  narrows,  the  possession  of  which  she  will  so  much 
desire?  No — there  is  not  one.  And  how  did  we  obtain  this  advan- 
tage for  her  ?  The  parallel  of  45  north  was  established  by  the  treaty 
of  '83  as  our  boundary  with  Canada  in  that  part  of  the  line.  But, 
as  1  have  stated,  that  line  was  found  to  run  south  of  Rouse's  Point. 
And  how  did  we  get  back  this  precious  possession  ?  By  running  a 
little  semi-circle  like  that  of  the  Dutch  King?  Noj  we  went  back  to 
the  old  line,  which  had  always  been  supposed  to  be  the  true  line, 
and  the  establishment  of  which  gave  us  not  only  Rouse's  Point,  but 
a  strip  of  land  containing  some  thirty  or  forty  thousand  acres  between 
the  parallel  of  45  and  the  old  line. 

The  same  arrangement  gave  us  a  similar  advantage  in  Vermont;  and 
I  have  never  heard  that  the  constituents  of  my  friend  near  me,  (Mr. 
Phelps,)  made  any  complaint  of  the  treaty.    That  State  got  about 
sixty  or  seventy  thousand  acres,  including  several  villages,  which 
would  otherwise  have  been  left  on  the  British  side  of  the  line.     We 
received  Rouse's  Point,  and  this  additional  land,  as  one  of  the  equiva- 
lents for  the  cession  of  teriitory  made  in  Maine.     And  what  did  we 
do  for  New  Hampshire  ?    There  was  an  ancient  dispute  as  to  which 
was  the  northwesternmost  head  of  the  Connecticut  river.     Several 
streams  were  found,  either  of  which  might  be  insisted  on  as  the 
true  boundary.     But  we  claimed  that  called  Hall's  stream.     This 
had  not  formerly  been  allowed;  the  Dutch  award  did  not  give  to 
New  Hampshire  what  she  claimed;  and  Mr.  Van  Ness,  our  com- 
missioner, appointed  under  the  treaty  of  Ghent,  after  examining  the 
ground,  came  to  the  conclusion  that  we  were  not  entitled  to  Hall's 
stream.     I  thought  that  we  were  so  entitled,  although  I  admit  that 
Hall's  stream  does  not  join  the  Connecticut  river  till  after  it  has 
passed  the  parallel  of  45.     By  the  treaty  of  Washington  this  de- 
mand was  agreed  to,  and  it  gave  New  Hampshire  one  hundred  thou- 
sand acres  of  land.     I  do  not  say  that  we  obtained  this  wrongfully; 
but  I  do  say  that  we  got  that  which  Mr.  Van  Ness  had  doubted  our 


35 

light  to.  I  thought  the  claim  just,  however,  and  the  hne  was  estab- 
lished accordingly.  And  here  let  me  say  once  for  all,  that  if  we  had 
gone  for  arbitration,  we  should  inevitably  have  lost  what  the  treaty 
gave  to  Vermont  and  New  York;  because  all  that  was  clear  matter  of 
•cession,  and  not  adjustment  of  doubtful  boundary. 

I  think  that  I  ought  now  to  relieve  the  Senate  from  any  further  re- 
marks on  this  northeastern  boundary.  I  say  that  it  was  a  favorable 
arrangement,  both  to  Maine  and  Massachusetts,  and  that  nine-tenths 
of  their  people  are  well  satisfied  with  it;  and  I  say  also,  that  it  was 
advantageous  (o  New  Hampshire,  Vermont, and  New  York.  And  I 
say,  further,  that  it  gij^c  vp  no  important  military  point,  but,  on  the 
■contrary,  obtained  one  of  the  greatest  consecjuence  and  value.  And 
here  I  leave  that  part  of  the  case  for  the  consideration  of  the  Senate 
and  of  the  country. 

[Here  the  Senate  adjourned.] 

April  7, 1846. 
Mr.  WEBSTER  resumed.    Yesterday  I  read  an  extract  from  the 
proceedings  in  the  British  Parliament  of  a  despatch  of  Lord  Palmer- 
ston  to  Mr.  Fox,  in  which  Lord  Palmerston  says,  that  the  British 
<jiovernment,  as  early  as  1840,  had  perceived  that  they  never  could 
/Come  to  a  settlement  of  this  controversy  with  the  government  of  Mr. 
Van  Buren.     I  do  not  wish  to  say  whether  the  fault  was  more  on 
one  side  than  the  other;  but  I  wish  lo  bar,  in  the  first  place,  any  in- 
ference of  an  improper  character  which  may  be  drawn  from  that 
statement  of  tlie  British  secretary  of  foreign  allairs.     It  .vas  not,  that 
they  looked  forw&rd  to  a  change  which  should  bring  gentlemen  into 
power  more  pliable,  more  agreeable  to  the  purposes  of  England.  No, 
;sir,  those  remarks  of  Lord  Palmerston,  whether  true  or  false,  were 

• 

iiiot  caused  by  any  peculiar  stoutness  or  stiffness  which  Mr.  Van 
Buren  had  ever  maintained  on  our  side  of  the  merits  of  the  ques- 
tion. The  merits  of  the  boundary  question  were  never  discu^ed 
by  Mr.  Van  Buren  to  any  extent.  The  thing  that  his  Adminis- 
tration discussed  was  the  formation  of  a  convention  of  exploration 
and  arbitration  to  settle  the  question.  A  few  years  before  this 
despatch  of  Lord  Palmerston  to  Mr.  Fox,  the  two  Governments, 
^ns  I  have  repeatedly  said,  had  agreed  how  the  question  should  be  set- 
tled. They  had  agreed  that  there  should  be  an  exploration.  Mr. 
iVan  Buren  had  proposed  and  urged  arbitration  also.     Eno^land  ha4 


36 


agreed  tothis,  at  his  request.  The  Cover  iments  had  agreed  to 
theae  two  principles,  therefore,  long  before  the  date  of  that  letter  of 
Lord  Palnierston ;  and  from  that  agreement,  till  near  the  close 
of  Mr.  Van  Bnren'sadministration,  the  whole  correapondence  turned 
on  the  arrangement  of  details  of  a  convention  for  arbitration,  ac- 
cording to  the  stipulation  of  the  parties.  Therefore,  it  was  not  on 
account  of  any  notion  that  Mr.  Van  Buren  stood  up  for  Ameri- 
can questions  bettor  than  others.  It  was  because  these  subordinate 
questions  respecting  the  convention  for  arbitration  had  got  into  so  much 
complexity — so  embarrassed  with  projects  and  counter  projects — had 
become  so  difficult  and  entan^^led;  and  because  every  eflbrl  to  disen- 
tangle them  had  made  the  matter  worse.  On  this  account  alone  Lord 
Palmcrston  had  made  ♦he  remarks.  I  wish  to  draw  no  inference  that 
would  be  injurious  to  others,  to  make  no  imputation  on  Mr.  Van  Bu- 
ren .  But  it  is  necessary  to  remember ,  that  this  dispute  had  run  on  for 
years,  and  was  likely  to  run  on  forever,  though  the  main  principles  had 
already  been  agreed  on,  viz:  exploration  and  arbitration.  It  was  an 
endless  discussion  of  details,  and  forms  of  proceeding,  in  which  the 
parties  receded  farther  and  farther  from  each  other  every  day. 

One  thing  more, sir,  by  way  of  explantition.  I  referred  yesterday  to- 
the  report  made  t)y  Gen.  Wool  in  respect  to  the  road  from  Kennebec. 
In  point  of  fact,  the  place  which  Gen.  Wool  recommended  in  1838, 
to  be  fortified,  was  a  few  miles  farther  east,  towards  the  waters  of 
the  Penobscot  river,  than  Arnold's  route;  but,  generally,  the  remark 
I  made  was  perfectly  true,  that  east  of  that  line  there  has  not  been  a 
road  or  passage.  The  honorable  member  from  New  York  yesterday 
produced  extracts  from  certain  debates  in  Parliament  r&specting  tl?e 
importance  of  the  territory  ceded  to  England  in  a  mihtary  point  of 
view.  I  beg  to  refer  to  some  others  which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  but 
which  I  shall  not  read — the  speeches  of  Sir  Charles  Napier,  Lord 
Palmerston,  Sir  Howard  Douglass,  <fcc.,  as  an  offset  to  those 
quoted  by  the  honorable  member.  But  I  do  not  think  it  of  im- 
portance to  balance  those  opinions  against  each  other.  Some  gen- 
tlemen appear  to  entertain  one  set  of  opinions,  some  anotlierj 
and,  for  my  own  part,  I  candidly  admit  that  by  both,  one  and 
the  other,  facts  are  overstated.  I  do  not  believe,  sir,  that  any 
thing,  in  a  mihtary  point  of  view,  ceded  by  us  to  England,  is  of 
any  consequence  to  us  or  to  her;  or  that  any  thing  impoitant,  in^ 


8T 

that  respect,  was  ceded  by  eiiher  party,  except  one  thing— that  i^ 
Rouse's  Point.     I  do  believe  it  was  an  object  of  importance  to  re- 
possess ourselves  of  the  site  of  that  fortress,  and  to  that  point  I  shall 
proceed  to  make  a  few  remarks  that  escaped  rac  yesterday.     I  do  not 
complain  here  that  the  member  from  New  York  has  underrated  the 
importance  of  that  acciuieition.     He  has  not  spoken   of  it.     But 
what   I   do   complain   of— if  complaint  it  may  be  called — is,  that 
when   he  spoke   of  cessions  made   to   England   by   the   treaty  of 
Washington,  a  treaty   which  proposed  to   proceed   on  the  ground 
of  mutual  concessions,   ecjuivalents,  and   considerations — when  re- 
ferring to  such   a   treaty  to  show   the   concessions  made  to  Eng- 
land, he   did   not  consider    it    necessary   to   state,  on   the  other 
hand,  the  corresponding  cessions  made  by  England  to  us.     And  I 
say  again,  that  the  cession  of  Rouse's  Point  by  her,  must  be,  and 
is  considered  by  those  best  capable  of  appreciating  its  value,  of  more 
importance  than  all  the  cessions  we  made  to  England  in  a,military 
point;  and  to  show  how  our  Government  have  regarded  its  import- 
ance, let  me  remind  you,  that  immediately  on  the  close  of  the  last 
war,  although  the  country  was  heavily  in  debt,  there  was  nothing  to 
Avhich  the  Government  addressed  itself  with  more  zeal  than  to  fortify 
this  point,  as  the  natural  defence  of  Lake  Champlain.     As  early  as 
1816,  the  Government  paid  twenty  or  thirty  thousand  dollars  for  the 
site,  and  went  on  with  the  work  at  an  expense  of  one  hundred  thou- 
sand dollars.   But  in  1818,  the  astronomers,  appoioicd  on  both  sides, 
found  it  was  on  the  English  side  of  the  boundary.     That,  of  course, 
terminated  our  operations.     But  that  is  not  all.     How  did  our  Gov- 
ernment regard  the  acquisition  by  the  treaty  of  Washington?     Why 
the  ink  with  which  that  treaty  was  signed  was  hardly  dry,  when  the 
most  eminent  engineers  were  despatched  to  that  place,  who  examined 
its  strength  and  proceeded  to  renew  and  rebuild  it.     And  no  military 
v/ork — not  even  the  fortifications  for  the  defence  of  the  Narrows,  ap- 
proaching the  harbor  of  New  York,  has  been  proceeded  with  by  the 
Government  with  more  zeal.  Having  said  so  much,  sir,  I  will  merely 
add,  that  if  gentlemen  desire  to  obtain  more  information  on  this  im- 
portant subject,  they  may  consult  the  head  of  the  engineer  corps,  Col. 
Totten,  and  Commodore  Morris,  who  went  there  by  instructions  to 
examine  it,  and  who  reported  thceon. 

And  here,  sir,  I  conclude  my  remarks  on  the  question  of  the. 
.Northeastern  Boundary. 


38 

And  I  now  leave  it  to  the  country  to  say ,  whether  this  question ,  Ms 
troublesome,  and  annoying,  and  dangerous  question,  which  had 
lasted  through  the  ordinary  length  of  two  generations,  having  novv 
been  taken  up,  in  1841 ,  was  not  well  settled,  and   ,,romptly  settled  f 
Whether  it  was  not  well  settled  for  Maine  and  Massachusetts,  and 
well  settled  for  the  whole  country?    And  whether,  in  the  opinion  of 
all  fair  and  candid  men,  the  complaint  about  it  which  we  hear  at  this 
day   does  not  arise  entirely  from  a  desire  that  those  connected  with 
the  accomplishment  of  a  measure  so  important  to  the  peace  of  the 
country  should  not  be  allowed  to  derive  too  much  credit  from  it? 

Mr  President,  the  destruction  of  the  steamboat  ''Caroline,"  in  the 
harbor  of  Schlosser,  by  a  British  force,  in  December,  1837,  and  the 
arrest  of  Alexander  McLeod,a  British  subject,  composing  part  ot 
that  force,  four  years  afterwards,  by  the  authorities  of  New  York, 
and  his  trial  for  an  alleged  murder  committed  by  him  on  that 
occasion  J  have  been  subjects  of  remark,  here  and  elsewhere,  at 
this  session  of  Congress.  They  are  connected  subjects,  and  call,  m 
the  first  place,  for  a  brief  liistorical  narrative. 

In  the  year  1837  a  civil  commotion,  or  rebellion,  which  had  bro- 
ken out  in  Canada, had  been  suppressed ,  and  many  persons  engaged' 
in  it  had  fled  to  the  liuted  States.  In  the  autumn  of  that  year  these 
persons,  associating  with  themselves  many  persons  of  lawless  cha- 
racter in  the  United  States,  made  actual  war  on  Canada,  and  took 
possession  of  Navy  Island,  belonging  to  England,  in  the  Niagara 
river  It  may  be  the  safest  course  to  give  an  account  of  these 
occunences  from  official  sources.  Mr.  Van  Buren  thus  recites  the 
facts,  as  the  Government  of  the  United  States  understood  them,  m, 
his  message  of  December,  1838: 

"I  had  hoped  that  the  respect  for  the  laws  and  regard  for  the  peace  and  honor  of 
their  own  country,  which  has  ever  characterized  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  would 
have  prevented  any  portion  of  them  from  using  any  means  to  promote  '"-section  m 
the  territory  of  a  power  with  which  we  are  at  peace,  and  with  which  the  United  States 
are  desirous  of  maintaining  the  most  friendly  relations.  I  regret  deeply,  however,  to 
be  obli"-od  to  inform  you  that  this  has  not  been  the  case. 

"Information  has  been  given  to  me,  derived  from  official  and  other  sources,  that 
many  citizens  of  the  United  States  have  associated  together  to  make  hostile  incursions 
from  our  territory  into  Canada,  and  to  aid  and  abet  insurrection  there,  m  violatioi.  .f  tb  . 
obligations  and  laws  of  the  United  States,  and  in  open  disregard  of  their  own  duties  as 
citizens.  This  information  has  been  in  part  confirmed,  by  a  hostile  invasion  actually 
^ade  by  citizens  of  the  United  States,  in  conjunction  wiUi  Canadians  and  others,  and: 


39 


accompanied  by  a  forcible  seizure  of  the  property  of  our  citizens,  and  an  application 
thereof  to  the  prosecution  of  military  operations  against  the  authorities  and  people  of 
Canada.  The  results  of  these  criminal  assaults  upon  the  peace  and  order  of  a  neiglibor- 
ing  country  have  been,  as  was  to  be  expected,  fetally  destructive  to  the  misguided  or 
deluded  persons  engaged  in  them,  and  highly  injurious  to  those  in  whose  behalf  they 
are  professed  to  have  been  undertaken.  The  authorities  in  Canada,  from  inteUigence 
received  of  such  intended  movements  among  our  citizens,  have  felt  themselves  obliged 
to  take  precautionary  measures  against  them,  have  actually  embodied  the  militia,  and 
assumed  an  attitude  to  repel  an  invasion,  to  which  they  believed  the  colonies  were  ex- 
posed from  the  United  States.  A  state  of  feeling  on  both  sides  of  the  frontier  had  thus 
been  produced,  which  called  for  prompt  and  vigorous  interference." 

The  following  is  the  British  account  of  the  same  occurrence: 

"  In  this  state  of  things,  a  small  band  of  Canadian  refugees,  who  had  taken  shelter 
in  the  State  of  New  York,  formed  a  league  with  a  number  of  the  citizens  of  the  United 
States  for  the  purpose  of  invading  the  British  territory,  not  to  join  a  pai-ty  engaged  in 
civil  war,  because  civil  war  at  that  time  in  Canada  there  was  none,  but  in  order  to  com- 
mit, within  the  British  territory,  the  crimes  of  robbery,  arson,  and  murder. 

"  By  a  neglect  on  the  part  of  that  government,  (N.  Y.,)  which  seems  to  admit  of  but 
one  explanation,  the  storehouses  which  contained  the  arms  and  ammunition  of  tHe  State 
■were  left  unguarded,  and  were  consequently  broken  open  by  this  gang,  who  carried  off 
thence  in  open  day,  and  in  the  most  public  manner,  cannon,  and  other  implements  of  war. 

"  After  some  days'  preparation,  these  people  proceeded,  without  any  interruption 
from  the  government  or  authorities  of  the  State  of  New  York,  and  under  the  command 
of  an  American  citizen,  to  invade  and  occupy  Navy  Island,  and  part  of  the  British  ter- 
ritory; and,  having  engaged  the  steamboat  Caroline,  which,  for  their  special  service, 
■wds  cut  out  of  the  ice,  in  which  she  had  been  enclosed  in  the  port  of  BufTido,  they  had 
xised  her  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  over  to  Navy  Island,  from  the  United  States  terri- 
tory, men,  arms,  ammunition,  stores,  and  provisions. 

"  The  preparations  made  for  this  invasion  of  British  territory  by  a  band  of  men  orga- 
nized, armed,  and  equipped  within  the  United  States,  and  consisting  partly  of  British 
subject.s  and  partly  of  American  citizens,  had  induced  the  British  authorities  to  station  a 
military  force  at  Chippewa,  to  repel  the  threatened  invasion,  and  to  defend  Her  Majes- 
ty's territory.  The  commander  of  that  fort,  seeing  that  the  Caroline  was  used  as  a 
means  of  supply  and  reinforcenieiit  for  the  invaikrs.  who  had  occupied  Navy  Island,  judged 
that  the  capture  and  destruction  of  that  vessel  would  prevent  supplies  and  reinforcements 
from  passing  over  to  the  island,  and  would,  moreover,  deprive  the  force  on  the  island 
of  the  means  of  passing  over  to  the  British  territory  on  the  main  land  '' 

According  to  the  British  account,  the  expedition  sent  to  capture  the 
Caroline  expected  to  find  her  at  Navy  Island;  but  when  the  com- 
manding officer  came  round  the  point  of  the  island  in  the  night  he 
found  that  she  was  moored  to  the  other  shore.  This  did  not  deter 
him  from  making  the  capture.  In  that  capture  a  citizen  of  the  Uni- 
ted States  by  the  name  of  Durfree  lost  his  life;  the  British  authorities 
pretend,  by  a  chance  shot  by  one  of  his  own  party;  the  American, 
by  a  shot  from  one  of  the  British  party. 


40 


This  transaction  took  place  on  the  29th   of  December,  1837, 
in  the    first  year  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's    Administration;  and  no 
sooner  was    it  known    here,    and    made    the    subject  of  a  com- 
munication by  Mr.  Forsythe  to  Mr.  Fox,  than  the  latter  avowed  it, 
as  an  act  done  by  the  British  authorities,  and  justified  it,  as  a  proper  and 
necessary  measure  of  self-defence.     Observe,  sir,  if  you  please,  that 
the  Caroline  was  destroyed   in  December,  1837,  and  Mr.  Fox's 
avowal  of  that  destruction,  as  a  Government  act,  and  his  justification 
of  it,  were  made  in  January  following,  so  soon  as  knowledge  of  the 
occurrence  reached  Washington.    Now,  sir,  if  the  avowal  of  the 
British  minister,  made  in  the  name  of  his  Government,  was  a  suffi- 
ciently authentic  avowal,  why,  then,  from  that  moment,  the  Govern- 
ment of  Great  Britain  became  responsible  for  the  act,  and  the  United 
Slates  was  to  look  to  that  Government  for  reparation  or  redress,  or 
whatever  act,  or  acknowledgment,  or  apology ,  the  case  called  for.     If 
Mr.  Pox's  letter  was  proper  proof  that  the  destruction  of  the  Caro- 
line was  an  act  of  public  force,  then  the  Government  of  Great  Britain 
was  directly  responsible  to  the  Government  of  the  United  States; 
and  of  the  British  Government  directly,  and  the  British  Govern- 
ment only,  was  satisfaction  to  be  demanded.     Nothing  was  imme- 
-^istely   done;    the    matter   was  suffered    to  lie,    and    grow  cool; 
but  it  afterwards  became   a  question,   at  what   time    the  United 
States  Government  did  first  learn,  by  sufficient  evidence  and  autho- 
rity, that  the  British  Government  had  avowed  the  destruction  of  the 
Caroline  as  its  own  .  ct.     Now,  in  the  first  place,  there  was  the  direct 
avowal  of  Mr.  Fox  made  at  the  time,  and  never  disapproved.     This 
avowal,  and  the  account  of  the  tran-saction,  reached  London  in  Feb- 
ruary, 1838.     Lord  Palmerstcn  thinks  that,  in  conversations  with 
Mr.  Stevenson,  not  long  subsequent,  he  intimated  distinctly, that  the 
destruction  of  the  vessel  would  turn  out  to  be  justifiable.     At  all 
events,  it  is  certain,  that,  on  the  22a  day  of  May,  1838,  ^n  an  official 
note  to  Lord  Palmerston,  written  by  instructions  from  his  Government, 
demanding  reparation  for  her  destruction,  Mr.  Stevenson  did  state, 
that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  did  consider  that  transaction  as 
an  outrage  upon  the  United  Stales,  and  a  violation  of  United  Stales 
territory,  committed  by  British  troops,  planned  and  executed  by  the 
Lieutenant  Governor  of  Upper  Canada."     It  is  clear,  then,  that  the 
Government  of  the  United  Slates  so  understood  the  matter,  when  it 


41 


gave  Mr.  Stevenson  the  instructions,  on  which  he  made  this  demand. 
The  administration  knew,  full  well,  that  the  expedition  was  a  i^ablic 
expedition,  set  on  foot  by  the  authorities  of  Canada,  avowed  here, 
immediately,  by  Mr,  Fox  as  an  act  for  which  the  British  Government 
took  upon  itself  the  responsibility,  and  never  disavowed  by  that  Gov- 
ernment at  any  time  or  in  any  way. 

And  now,  sir,  why  was  this  aggression  on  the  territory  of  the  Unit- 
ed States,  why  was  this  indignity,  suffered  to  remain  unvindicated 
and  unredressed,  for  three  years'?  Why  was  no  answer  made,  and 
none  insisted  on,  to  Mr.  Stevenson's  official  and  direct  demand  for 
reparation ?  The  jealous  guardians  of  national  honor,  so  tenaciously 
alive  to  what  took  place  in  1842,  what  opiale  had  drugged  their  pa- 
triotism for  so  many  years?  Whose  fault  was  if  that,  up  to  1841, 
the  Government  of  Great  Britain  had  been  brought  to  no  acknow- 
ledgment, no  explanation,  no  apology?  This  long  and  unbroken 
slumber  over  public  outrage  and  national  indignity,  who  indulged  in 
it?  Nay,  if  the  Government  of  the  United  States  thought  it  had  not 
sufficient  evidence  that  the  outrage  was, as  it  had  declared  it  to  be  itseK, 
a  public  outrage,  then  it  was  a  private  outrage,  the  invasion  of  our 
territory,  and  the  murder  of  an  American  citizen,  without  any  justi- 
fication, or  pretence  of  justiEcauon;  and  had  it  not  become  high  time 
that  such  an  outrage  was  redressed? 

Sir,  there  is  no  escape  from  this.  The  administration  of  Mr.  Van 
Buren  knew  perfectly  well  that  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline  was 
an  act  of  public  force,  done  by  the  British  authorities  in  Canada. 
They  knew  it  had  never  been  disavowed  at  home.  The  act  was  a 
wrongful  one  on  the  part  of  the  Canadian  forces.  They  had  no 
right  to  invade  the  territory  of  the  United  States.  It  was  an  aggres- 
sion for  which  satisfaction  was  due,  and  should  have  been  insisted  on 
immediately,  and  insisted  on  perseveringly.  But  this  was  not  done. 
.  The  administration  slept,  and  slept  on,  and  would  have  slept  till 
this  tune,  if  it  had  not  been  waked  by  the  arrest  of  McLeod.  Be- 
ing on  this  side  of  the  line,  and  making  foolish  and  false  boasts  of 
his  murtial  achievements,  McLeod  was  arrested  in  November,  1840, 
on  a  charge  for  the  murder  of  Durfree  ,in  capturing  theCaroline ,  and  com- 
mitted to  prison  by  the  authorities  of  New  York.  He  was  bailed ;  but  vio- 
lence and  mobs  overawed  the  courts,  and  he  was  recommitted  to  jail. 
This  was  an  important  and  very  exciting  occurrence.    Mr.  Fox  made  a 


I 


42 

demand  for  his  immediate  release .  The  administration  of  Mr  .Van  Bu- 
ren  roused  itself,  and  looked  round  to  ascertain  its  position.  Mr.  Fox 
again  asserted ,  that  the  destruction  of  die  Caroline  was  an  act  of  public 
force,  done  by  public  authority , and  avowed  by  the  English  Government, 
as  the  American  Government  had  long  before  known .  To  this  Mr.  For- 
sythe  replied,  in  a  note  of  December  26,  1840,  thus:  ''  If  the  de- 
struction of  the  CaroUne  was  a  public  act  of  persons  in  Her  Majesty's 
service,  obeying  the  order  of  their  superior  authorities,  this  fact  has 
not  been  before  communicated  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  by  a  person  authorized  to  make  the  admission."  Certainly,. 
Mr.  President,  it  is  not  easy  to  reconcile  this  language  with  the  in- 
structions, under  which  Mr.  Stevenson  made  his  demand,  of  May,. 
1838,  and  which  demand  he  accompanied  with  the  declaration,  that 
the  act  was  planned  and  executed  by  the  authorities  of  Canada. 
Whether  the  act  of  the  Governor  had  or  had  not  been  approved  at 
home,  the  Government  of  the  United  States,  one  would  think,  could 
hardly  need  to  be  informed,  in  1840,  that  that  act  was  committed  by 
persons  in  Her  Majesty's  service,  obeying  the  order  of  their  superior 
authorities.  Mr.  Forsythe  adds,  very  properly,  that  it  will  be  for  the 
courts  to  decide  on  the  validity  of  the  defence.  It  is  worthy  of  re- 
mark that,  in  this  letter  of  December  26, 1840,  Mr.  Forsythe  com- 
plains, that  up  to  that  day  the  Government  of  the  United  States  had 
not  become  acquainted  with  the  views  and  intentions  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  England  respecting  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline  !  Now, 
Mr.  President,  this  was  the  state  of  things  in  the  winter  of  1840,  '41, 
and  on  the  4th  of  March,  1841,  when  Gen.  Wm.  H.  Harrison  be- 
came President  of  the  United  States. 

On  the  12th  of  that  same  month  of  March,  Mr.  Fox  wrote  to  the 
Department  of  State  a  letter,  in  which,  after  referrirj  to  his  original 
correspondence  with  Mr.  Forsythe,  in  which  he  had  avowed  and  jus- 
tified the  capture  of  the  Caroline  as  an  act  of  necessary  defence,  he 
proceeds  to  say : 

"  The  undersigned  is  directed,  in  the  first  place,  to  make  known  to  the  Government  of 
the  U.  S.,  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  entirely  approve  of  the  course  pursued  by 
the  undersigned  in  that  correspondence,  and  of  the  language  adopted  by  him  in  the  offi- 
cial letters  above  mentioned.  * 

"And  the  undersigned  is  now  instructed  again  to  demand  from  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  formally,  in  the  name  of  tlie  British  Government,  the  immediate  release 
of  Mr.  Alexander  McLeod. 


j'i;  I 


M 


m 


"The  o-rounds  upon  which  the  British  Government  make  this  demand  upon  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  U.  S.  are  these:  That  the  transaction,  on  account  of  which  Mr.  McLeod 
has  been  arrested  and  is  to  be  put  upon  his  trial,  was  a  transaction  of  a  public  character, 
planned  and  executed  by  persons  duly  empowered  by  Her  Majesty's  colonial  authorities 
to  take  any  steps,  and  do  any  acts,  which  might  be  necessary  for  the  defence  of  Her 
Majesty's  territories,  and  for  the  protection  of  Her  Majesty's  subjects ;  and  that,  conse- 
quently, those  subjects  of  Her  Mnjesty,  who  engaged  in  that  transaction,  were  perform- 
ing an  act  of  public  duty  for  which  they  cannot  be  made  personally  and  individually  an- 
swerable to  the  laws  and  tribunals  of  any  foreign  country. 

"The  transaction  may  have  been,  as  Her  Majesty'd  Government  are  of  opinion  that  it 
was,  a  justifiable  employment  of  force  for  the  purpose  of  defending  the  British  territory 
from  the  unprovoked  attack  of  a  band  of  British  rebels  and  American  pirates,  who, 
having  been  permitted  to  arm  and  organize  themselves  within  the  territory  of  the  U. 
S.,  had  actually  invaded  and  occupied  a  portion  of  the  territory  of  Her  Majesty  ;  or  it 
may  have  been,  as  alleged  by  Mr.  Forsylhe  in  hia  note  to  the  undersigned  of  the  26th 
of  December,  'a  most  unjustifiable  invasion,  in  time  of  peace,  of  the  territory  of  the  U.. 
S.'     But  it  is  a  question  essentially  of  a  political  and  international  kind,  which  can  be 
discussed  and  settled  only  between  the  two  Governments,  and  which  the  courts  of  jus- 
tice of  the  State  of  New  York  cannot  by  possibility  have  any  means  of  judging,  or  any- 
right  of  deciding." 

The  British  Government  insisted  that  it  must  have  been  known,  and 
was  well  known ,  long  before,  that  it  had  avowed  and  justified  the  cap- 
ture of  the  Caroline,  and  taken  upon  itself  the  responsibility.  Mr.  For- 
sythe,  as  you  have  seen,  sir,  in  his  note  of  December  26th,  had  said^ 
that  fact  had  not  been  before  communicated  by  a  person  authorized 
to  make  the  admission.     Well,  sir,  then,  what  was  now  to  be  done? 
Here  was  a  new,  fresh,  and  direct  avowal  of  the  act  by  the  British 
Government,  and  a  formal  demand  for  McLeod's  immediate  release. 
And  how  did  Gen.  Harrison's  administration  treat  this?     Sir,  just  as 
it  ought  to  have  treated  it.     It  was  pot  poor  and  mean  enough  in  it» 
intercourse  with  a  foreign  Government,  to  make  any  reflections  on  its 
predecessor,  or  appear  to  strike  out  a  new  path  for  itself.     It  did  not 
seek  to  derogate,  in  the  slightest  degree,  from  the  propriety  of  what 
had  been  said  and  done  by  Mr.  Van  Buren  and  Mr.  Forsythe, 
whatever  eminent  example  it  might  have  found,  for  such  a  course 
of  conduct.     No;  it  rather  adopted  what  Mr.  Forsythe  had  said  in 
December,  to  wit,  that  at  that  time  no  authentic  avowal  had  been 
communicated  to  the  United  States.    But  now  an  avowal  had  been 
made,  on  the  authority  of  the  Government  itself;  and  Gen.  Harrison 
acted,  and  rightly  acted,  on  the  case  made  by  this  avowal.     And 
what  opinions  did  he  form,  and  what  course  did  he  pursue,  in  a  cri- 


I 


Ill 


44 

813;  and  in  regard  to  transactions,  so  intimately  connected  with  the 
peace  and  honor  of  the  country? 

Sir,  in  the  first  place ,  Gen .  Harrison  was  of  opinion ,  that  the  entering 
of  the  U.  S.  territory,  hy  British  troops,  for  the  purpose  of  capturing 
or  destroying  the  Caroline,  was  unjustifiable.  That  it  was  an  aggres- 
sion, a  violation  of  the  territory  of  the  United  Slates.  Not  that  the 
British  forces  might  not  have  destroyed  that  vessel,  if  they  could  have 
found  her  on  their  ov/n  side  of  the  line;  for  she  was  unlawfully  em- 
ployed-she  was  assisting  to  make  war  on  Canada.  But  she  could 
not  be  followed  into  a  port  of  the  United  States,  and  there  captured. 
This  was  an  oflTence  to  the  dignity  and  sovereignty  of  this  Govern- 
ment, for  which  apology  and  sali.^faction  ought  long  since  to  have 
been  obtained ,  and  which  apology  and  satisfaction  it  was  not  yet  too 
late  to  demand.     This  was  Gen   Harrison's  opinion. 

In  the  next  place,  and  on  the  other  hand,  Gen.  Harrison  was  of 
opinion,  that  the  arrest  and  detention  of  McLeod  were  contrary  to  the 
w  of  nations.  McLeod  was  a  soldier,  acting  under  the  authority  of 
his  Government,  and  obeying  orders  which  he  was  bound  to  obey.  It 
was  absurd  to  say,  that  a  soldier,  who  must  obey  orders  or  oe  shot, 
may  still  be  hanged  if  he  does  obey  them.  Was  Gen.  Harrison  tJ 
turn  aside,  from  facing  the  British  lion ,  and  fall  on  a  lamb  ?  Was  he 
to  quail  before  the  crown  of  England,  and  take  vengeance  on  a  pri- 
vate soldier  ?  No ,  sir,  that  was  not  in  character  for  Wm .  H,  Harrison . 
He  held  the  British  Government  responsible;  he  died,  to  the  great 
grief  of  his  country,  but  in  the  time  of  his  successor  that  responsi- 
bdity  was  justly  appealed  to,  and  satisfactorily  fulfilled. 

Mr.  Fox's  letter,  written  under  instructions  from  Lord  Palmerston, 
was  a  little  peremptory,  and  some  expressions  were  regarded  as  not 
quite  courteous  and  conciliatory.  This  caused  some  hesitation;  but 
Gen.  Harrison  said  that  he  would  not  cavil  at  phrases,  since,  in  the 
mam,  the  British  complaint  was  well  founded,  and  we  ought  at 
once  to  do  what  we  could  to  place  ourselves  right. 

Sir,  the  members  of  the  administration  were  all  of  one  mind  on 
tins  occasion.  Gen.  Harrison,  himself  a  man  of  large  general  read- 
ing and  long  experience,  was  decidedly  of  opinion  that  McLeod 
could  not  be  lawfully  hoklen  to  answer,  in  the  courts  of  New  York, 
for  what  had  been  done  by  him ,  as  a  soldier,  under  superior  orders.  All 
the  members  of  the  Administration  were  of  the  same  opinion,  without 


45 

doubt  or  hesitation,  I  may,  without  impropriety, say,  (hat  Mr.  Crit- 
tenden, Mr.  E  wing,  Mr  Bell,  Mr.  Badger,  and  Mr.  Granger  were 
not  all  likely  to  come  to  an  erroneous  conclusion,  on  this  question  of 
public  law,  after  they  had  given  it  full  consideration  and  examinatioa. 
Mr.  Fox's  letter  was  answered;  and  from  that  answer  I  will  read 
an  extract: 

"Mr.  Fox  informs  the  Government  of  the  United  States  that  he  is  instructed  to  maka 
known  to  it  that  the  Government  of  Her  Majesty  entirely  approve  the  course  pursued 
by  him  in  his  correspondence  with  Mr.  Forsythe  in  December  last,  and  the  language 
adopted  by  him  on  that  occasion;  and  that  the  Government  have  instructed  him  'again 
to  demand  from  the  Government  of  ths  United  States,  formally,  in  the  name  of  tlie 
British  Government,  the  immediate  release  of  Mr.  Alexander  McLeod ;'  that  '  the 
grounds  upon  which  the  British  Government  make  this  demand  upon  the  Government 
of  the  United  States  are  these:  That  the  transaction  on  account  of  which  Mr.  McLeod 
lias  been  arrested,  and  is  to  be  put  upon  his  trial,  wns  a  transaction  of  a  public  character, 
^  planned  and  executed  by  persons  duly  empowered  by  Her  Majesty's  colonial  autljori- 
ties  to  take  any  steps  and  to  do  any  acts  which  might  be  necessary  for  the  defence  of 
Her  Majesty's  territories,  and  for  the  protection  of  Her  Majesty's  subjects  ;  and  that, 
consequently,  those  subjects  of  Her  Majesty  who  engaged  in  that  transaction  were  per- 
forming an  act  of  public  duty,  for  which  they  cannot  be  made  personally  and  individu- 
ally answerable  to  the  laws  and  tribimals  of  any  foreign  country. 

"  The  President  is  not  certain  that  he  understands  precisely  the  meaning  intended  by 
Her  Majesty's  Government  to  be  conveyed  l)y  the  foregoing  instruction. 

"  This  doubt  has  occasioned  with  the  President  some  hesitation ;  but  he  inclines  to 
take  it  for  granted  that  the  main  purpose  of  the  instruction  was  to  cause  it  to  be  signi- 
fied to  the  Government  of  the  United  States  that  the  attack  on  the  steamboat '  Caroline' 
was  an  act  of.  public  force,  done  by  the  British  colonial  authorities,  and  fully  recognised 
by  the  Q,ueen's  Government  at  home;  and  that,  consequently,  no  individual  concerned 
in  that  transaction  can,  according  to  the  just  principles  of  the  laws  of  nations,  be  held 
personally  answerable,  in  the  ordinary  courts  of  law,  as  for  a  private  offence  ;  and  that, 
upon  this  avowal  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  Alexander  McLeod,  now  imprisoned 
on  an  indictment  for  murder,  alleged  to  have  been  committed  in  that  attack,  ought  to  be 
released  by  such  proceedings  as  are  usual  and  are  suitable  to  the  case. 

"  The  President  adopted  the  conclusion,  that  nothing  more  than  this  could  have  been 
intended  to  be  expressed,  from  the  consideration  that  Her  Majesty's  Government  must 
be  fully  aware  that,  in  the  United  States,  as  in  England,  persons  confined  under  judicial 
process  can  be  released  from  that  confinement  only  by  judicial  process.  In  neither  coun- 
try, as  the  undersigned  supposes,  can  the  arm  of  the  ExecuUve  power  interfere,  direct- 
ly or  forcibly,  to  release  or  deliver  the  prisoner.  His  discharge  must  be  sought  in  a 
manner  conformable  to  the  principles  of  law  and  the  proceedings  of  courts  of  judicature. 
If  any  indictment  like  that  which  has  been  found  against  Alexander  McLeod,  and  un"- 
der  circumstances  like  those  which  belong  to  his  case,  were  pending  against  an  individual 
in  one  of  the  courts  of  England,  th«re  is  no  dcubt  that  the  law  officer  of  the  crown  might 
enter  a  nolle  prosequi,  or  that  the  prisoner  might  cause  himself  to  be  brought  up  on 
habeas  corpus  and  discharged,  if  his  ground  of  discharge  should  be  adjudged  sufficient^ 


46 


•or  that  he  might  prove  the  same  facts,  and  insist  on  the  same  defence  or  exemption  oi 

his  trial. 

"  All  these  are  legal  modes  of  proceeding,  well  known  to  the  laws  and  practice  of 

both  countries.     But  the  undersigned  does  not  suppose  that,  if  such  a  case  were  to  arise 

in  England,  the  power  of  the  Executive  Government  could  be  exerted  in  any  more  direct 

manner. 

"  Even  in  the  case  of  ambassadors  and  other  public  ministers,  whose  right  to  exemp- 
tion from  arrest  is  personal,  requiring  no  fact  to  be  ascertained  but  the  mere  fact  of  dip- 
lomatic character,  and  to  arrest  whom  is  sometimes  made  a  highly  penal  offence,  if  the 
•arrest  be  actually  made,  it  must  be  discharged  by  application  to  the  courts  of  law. 

"  It  is  understood  that  Alexander  McLeod  is  holden,  as  well  on  civil  as  on  criminal 
process,  for  acts  alleged  to  have  been  done  by  him  in  the  attack  on  the  'Caroline,'  and 
his  defence  or  gi-ound  of  acquittal  must  be  the  same  in  both  cases.  And  this  strongly 
illustrates,  as  the  undersigned  conceives,  the  propriety  of  the  foregoing  observations  ; 
fince  it  is  quite  clear  tliat  the  Executive  Government  cannot  interfere  to  arrest  a  civil 
suit  between  private  parties  in  any  stage  of  its  progress,  but  that  such  suit  must  go  on 
to  its  regular  judicial  termination.  If,  therefore,  any  course  diflferent  from  such  as  have 
been  now  mftitioned  was  in  contemplation  of  Her  Majesty's  Government,  something, 
•would  seem  to  have  been  expected  from  the  Government  of  the  United  States  as  little 
conformable  to  the  laws  and  usages  of  the  English  Government  as  to  those  of  the  Uni- 
ted States,  and  to  which  this  Government  cannot  accede. 

"  The  Government  of  the  United  States,  therefore,  acting  upon  the  presumption 
Avhich  is  already  adopted,  that  nothing  extraordinary  or  unusual  was  expected  or  re- 
quested of  it,  decided,  on  the  reception  of  Mr.  Fox's  note,  to  take  such  measures  as 
the  occasion  and  its  own  duty  appeared  to  require. 

"  In  his  note  to  Mr.  Fox  of  the  26th  of  December  last,  Mr.  Forsythe,  the  Secretary 
of  State  of  the  United  States,  observes,  that,  '  if  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline  was  a 
public  ret  of  persons  in  Her  Majesty's  service,  obeying  the  order  of  their  superior  au- 
thorities, this  fact  has  not  been  before  communicated  to  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  by  a  person  authorized  to  make  the  admission ;  and  it  will  be  for  the  court, 
-which  has  taken  cognizance  of  the  offence  with  which  Mr.  McLeod  is  charged,  to  de- 
cide upon  its  validity  when  legally  established  before  it;'  and  adds:  'The  President 
deems  this  a  proper  occasion  to  remind  the  Government  of  Her  Britannic  Majesty  that 
the  case  of  the  Caroline  has  been  long  since  brought  to  the  attention  of  Her  Majesty's 
principal  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Affairs,  who,  up  to  this  day,  has  not  com- 
municated its  decision  thereupon.     It  is  hoped  that  the  Government  of  Her  Ma- 
jesty will  perceive  the  importance  of  no  longer  leaving  the  Government  of  the  United 
States  uninformed  of  its  views  and  intentions  upon  a  subject  which  has  naturally  pro- 
duced much  exasperation,  and  which  has  led  to  such  grave  consequences.' 

"  The  communication  of  the  fact  that  the  destruction  of  the  '  Caroline'  was  an  act  of 
public  force  by  the  British  authorities  being  formally  communicated  to  the  Government 
o{  the  United  States  by  Mr.  Fox's  note,  the  case  assumes  a  different  aspect. 

"The  Government  of  the  United  States  entertains  no  doubt  that,  after  this  avowal 
•of  the  transaction  as  a  public  transaction,  authorized  and  undertaken  by  the  British  au- 
thorities, individuals  concerned  in  it  ought  not,  by  the  principles  of  public  law  and  the 
general  usage  of  civilized  States,  to  be  holden  personally  responsible  in  the  ordinary 
tribunals  oflaw  for  their  participation  in  it.  And  the  President  presumes  that  it  can 
hardly  bc'necessary  to  say  that  the  American  people,  not  distrustful  of  their  ability  to 


> 


47 


> 


«dres   pubhc  wrongs  by  puohc  means,  cannot  desire  the  punishment  of  indiriduafa 
vhen  the  act  complained  of  is  declared  to  have  been  the  act  of  the  Government  itself 

"  Soon  after  the  date  of  Mr.  Fox's  note  an  instruction  was  given  to  ZlTl. 
Genera,  of  the  United  Stat,  from  this  Department,  by  direction  yre  Pre^^^^^^^^^^ 
fully  sets  forth  the  op.nions  of  this  Government  on  the  subject  of  Mr.   McLeod^  im 
pnsonment ;  a  copy  of  which  instruction  the  undersigned  has  the  honor  herewith  to  en- 

"The  indictment  against  McLeod  is  pending  in  a  State  court;  but  his  rights  what- 
ever they  may  be  are  no  less  safe,  it  is  to  be  presumed,  than  if  he  were  holden  't^^. 
«wer  m  one  o{  this  Government.  ^ 

"He  demands  immunity  from  personal  responsibility  by  virtue  of  the  law  of  nations- 
and  that  law,  m  c.vihzed  States,  is  to  be  respected  m  all  courts.  None  is  either  so  rh 
.r^so^low  as  to  escape  from  its  authority  in  cases  to  which  ,ts  rules  and  principt 

And  now,  sir,  who  will  deny  that  this  decision  was  entirely  cor- 
rect?   Who  will  deny  that  this  arrest  of  McLeod,  and  this  threatening 
to  hang  hun,  was  just  cause  of  offence  to  the  British  Government? 
feir,  what  snould  we  have  thought  ourselves,  in  a  like  case-?    If 
United  States  troops,  by  the  lawful  authority  of  their  Government 
were  ordered  to  pass  over  the  line  of  boundary,  for  any  purpose-re- 
taliation, reprisal,  fresh  pursuit  of  an  enemy,  or  any  thing  else~and 
the  government  of  the  territory  invaded,  not  bringing  our  Govern- 
ment to  account,  but  sleeping  three  years  over  the  affront,  should  then 
snatch  up  one  of  our  citizens  found  in  its  jurisdiction,  and  who  had 
been  one  of  the  force,  and  proceed  to  try,  condemn,  and  execute 
him,  sir,  would  not  the  whole  country  have  risen  up  like  one  man? 
Should  we  have  submitted  to  it  for  a  moment?    Suppose  that  now 
by  order  of  the  President,  and  in  conformity  to  law,  an  Americaa 
army  should  enter  Canada,  or  Oregon,  for  any  purpose  which  the 
Government  of  the  United  States  thought  just,  and  was  ready  to  de- 
fend, and  the  British  Government,  turning  away  from  demanding  re- 
sponsibility or  satisfaction  from  us,  should  seize  an  individual  soldier, 
try  him,  convict  him,  and  execute  him,  sir,  should  we  not  declare 
war  at  once,  or  make  war?    Would  this  be  submitted  to  for  a  mo- 
inent?    Is  there  a  man,  with  an  American  heart  in  his  bosom,  who 
would  keep  still,  and  be  silent,  in  the  face  of  such  an  outrage  on 
public  law,  and  such  an  insult  to  the  flag  and  sovereignty  of  his 
country?    Who  would  endure,  that  an  American  soldier,  acting  ia 
obedience  to  lawful  authority,  and  with  the  eagle  and  the  stars  and 
stripes  over  his  head,  should  be  arrested,  tried,  and  executed  as  a  pri- 
vate murderer?    Sir,  if  we  had  receired  such  an  insult,  and  atone- 


I 


48 


ment  had  not  been  instantly  made,  we  should  have  avenged  it  at 
any  expense  of  treasure  and  of  blood.  A  manly  feeling  of  honor  and 
character,  therefore,  a  sense  of  justice, and  respect  for  the  opinion  of 
the  civiUzed  world,  a  conviction  of  what  would  have  been  our  own 
conduct,  in  a  like  case,  all  called  on  General  Harrison  to  do  exactly 

what  he  did. 

England  had  assumed  her  proper  responsibility,  and  what  was  it? 
She  had  made  an  aggression  upon  the  United  States  by  entering  her  ter- 
ritory for  a  belligerent  purpose.  She  had  invaded  the  sanctity  of  our 
territorial  rights.  As  to  the  mere  destruction  of  the  vessel,  if  perpe- 
trated on  the  Canadian  side,  it  would  have  been  quite  justifiable. 
The  persons  engaged  in  that  vessel  were,  it  is  to  be  remembered, 
violating  the  laws  of  their  own  country ,  as  well  as  the  law  of  nation* ; 
some  of  them  suffered  for  that  offence,  and  I  wish  all  had  suffered. 

Mr.  Allen  here  desired  to  know  where  the  proof  was  of  the  fact 
that  the  Caroline  was  so  engaged  ?    Was  there  any  record  of  the 

fact? 

Mr.  Webster.  Yes ;  there  is  proof— abundant  proof.  The  fact 
that  the  vessel  \  as  so  engaged  was,  I  believe,  pretty  well  proved  on 
the  trial  and  conviction  of  Van  Rensselaer.  But,  besides,  there  is 
abundant  proof  in  the  Department  of  State,  in  the  evidence  taken  in 
Canada  by  the  authorities  there,  and  sent  to  Great  Britain,  and  which 
could  be  confirmed  by  any  body  who  lived  any  where  from  Buffalo 
down  to  Schlosser.  It  was  proved  by  the  res  gestae.  What  was  the 
condition  and  conduct  of  the  Caroline  ?  Mr.  Stevenson,  making  the 
best  case  he  cowld  for  the  United  States,  said  that  she  was  cleared  out 
at  Buffalo,  in  the  latter  part  of  December,  to  ply  between  Buffalo  and 
Schlosser,  on  the  same  side  of  the  river  a  few  miles  below.  Lord 
Palmerstoujwith  his  usual  sarcasm,  and  with  more  than  a  usual  oc- 
casion for  the  application  of  that  sarcasm,  said,  ''It  was  very  true  she 
was  cleared  out;  but  Mr.  Stevenson  forgot  that  she  was  also  "cut 
out"  of  the  ice  in  which  she  had  been  laid  up  for  the  winter;  and 
that  in  departing  from  Buffalo,  instead  of  going  down  to  Schlosser, 
she  went  down  to  Navy  Island;"  and  his  lordship  asked ,  "Whatnew 
outbreak  of  traffic  made  it  necessary  to  have  a  steamboat  plying,  in 
the  depth  of  winter,  between  Buffalo  and  Schlosser,  when  exactly 
between  those  two  places  on  the  shore  there  was  a  very  convenient 
jailroad?"    I  will  most  respectfully  suggest  all  this  to  the  considera- 


t    V 


49 


tion  of  the  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Foreign  Relations.  And, 
as  further  evidence,  1  will  state  the  entire  omission  of  the  Govern- 
ment of  the  United  States,  during  the  whole  of  Mr.  Van  Buren's  ad- 
ministration, to  iriiike  liny  demand  for  reparation  for  the  property  de- 
stroyed. So  far  as  I  remember,  such  a  suggestion  was  never  made. 
But  one  thing  I  do  very  well  remember,  and  that  is,  tliat  a  person 
who  had  some  interest  in  the  property  came  to  the  city  of  Washing- 
ton, and  thought  of  making  an  application  to  die  Government,  in  the 
time  of  Mr.  Van  Buren,  for  indemnity. 

Well,  he  was  told  that  the  sooner  he  shut  his  mouth  on  that  sub- 
ject the  better,  for  he  himself,  knowing  that  the  purpose  to  which  the 
vessel  was  to  be  applied,  came  within  the  purview  of  the  statutes  of 
the  United  States  against  fitting  out  hostile  expeditions  against  coun- 
tries witli  which  the  United  States  were  at  peace,  was  liable  to  prose- 
cution; and  he,  ever  afterwards,  profiting  by  this  friendly  admoni- 
tion, held  his  peace.  That  was  another  piece  of  evidence  which  I 
respectfully  submit  to  the  consideration  of  the  Chairman  of  the 
Committee  on  Foreign  Relations. 

Well,  sir,  McLeod's  case  went  on  in  the  court  of  New  York,  and 
I  was  utterly  surprised  at  the  decision  of  that  court  on  the  habeas 
corpus.  On  the  peril  and  at  the  risk  of  my  professional  reputation, 
I  now  say,  that  the  opinion  of  the  court  of  New  York, in  that  case,  is 
not  a  respectable  opinion,  either  on  account  of  the  result  at  which  it 
arrives,  or  the  reasoning  on  which  it  proceeds.* 

McLeod  was  tried  and  acquitted ;  there  being  no  proof  that  he  had  killed 
Durfree.  Congress  afterwards  passed  an  act,  that,  if  such  cases  should 
arise  hereafter,  tliey  should  be  immediately  transferred  to  the  courts  of 
the  United  States.  That  was  a  necessary  and  a  proper  law.  It  was  re- 
quisite, in  order  to  enable  the  Government  of  the  United  States  to 
maintain  the  peace  of  the  country.  And  it  was  perfectly  constitu- 
tional; because  it  is  a  just  and  important  principle,  quite  a  funda- 
mental principle,  indeed,  that  the  judicial  power  of  the  General  Go- 


*  This  opinion  has  been  ably  and  learnedly  reviewed  by  Judge  Tallmadge,  of  the  Su-^ 
perior  Court  of  the  city  of  New  York.  Of  this  review,  the  late  Chief  Justice  Spencer 
says:  "  It  refutes  and  overthrows  the  opinion  most  amply."  Chancellor  Kent  says  of 
it :  "  It  ie  conclusive  upon  every  point.  I  should  have  been  proud  if  I  had  been  (be 
a^lhor  of  it."  The  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  New  York  is  not  likely  to  be  re- 
ceived, at  home  or  abroad,  as  the  American  »nderstanding  of  an  important  principle  of 
public  law. 

4 


I 


50 

vcrnrnent  should  be  coextensive  with  its  legislative  and  executive 
powers.  When  ilie  authority  end  duty  of  this  Government  is  to  be 
judicially  discussed  and  decided,  that  decision  must  be  in  the  courts 
of  the  United  Stales,  or. else  that  which  holds  the  Government  to- 
gether would  become  a  band  of  straw.  McLeod  ha\ins  l)een  ac- 
quitted, put  an  end  to  all  question  concerning  his  case;  and  Congress 
having  passed  a  law  providing  for  such  cases  in  future,  it  only  re- 
mained  that  a  proper  explanation  and  apology — all  that  a  nation  of 
high  honor  could  ask,  or  a  nation  of  high  honor  could  give — should 
be  obtained  for  the  violation  of  territorial  sovereignty;  and  that  was 
obtained.  Not  obtained  in  Mr.  Van  Buren's  time,  but  obtained, con- 
currently with  the  settlement  of  other  questions,  in  1842.  Appen- 
dix V. 

Before  Mr.  Fox's  letter  was  answered,  sir,  the  President  had  di- 
rected the  Attorney  General  to  proceed  to  New  York,  with  copies  of 
the  official  correspondence,  and  with  instructions  to  signify  to  the 
Governor  of  New  York  the  judgment  which  had  been  formed  here.* 
These  instructions  have  been  referred  to,  and  they  are  public.  The 
moment  was  critical.  A  mob  had  arrested  judicial  proceedings  on 
the  frontier.  The  trial  of  McLeod  was  expected  to  come  on  imme- 
diately at  Lockport;  and  what  would  be  the  fate  of  the  prisoner,  be- 
tween the  opinions  entertained  inside  of  the  court-house,  and  lawless 
violence  without,  no  one  could  foresee.  The  instructions  were  in 
the  spirit  of  the  answer  to  Mr.  Fox's  letter.  And  I  now  call  on  the 
member  from  New  York  to  furnish  authority  for  his  charge,  made  in 
his  speech  the  other  day,  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
had  "^interfered,  directly  and  palpably,"  with  the  proceedings  of 
the  courts  of  New  York.  It  is  untrue.  He  has  no  authority,  not  a 
particle,  for  any  such  statement.  All  that  was  done  was  made  pub- 
lic. He  has  no  other  authority  for  what  he  said  than  the  public 
papers;  they  .do  not  bear  him  out.  To  say,  on  the  ground 
of  what  is  public,  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States 
interfered,  "directly  and  palpably,"  with  the  proceedirtgs  in  New- 
York,  is  not  only  untrue,  but  ridiculous.  There  was  no  demand  for 
the  delivery  of  McLeod  to  the  United  States;  there  was  no  attempt 
to  arrest  the  proceedings  of  the  New  York  court.     Mr.  Fox  was  told 

that  these  proceedings  must  go  on,  until  they  wer   judicially  termi- 

, , 1 

♦Vide  Appendix  VI. 


•     > 


'''    • 


51 

naled ;  that  Mcl.eod  wna  iii  confinement,  by  judicial  process,  and  could 
on^jr  be  released  by  judicial  process  under  the  same  authority.  All 
this  ia  plainly  -rated  in  Mr.  Crittenden's  instructions,  and  no  man, 
who  reads  that  paper,  can  fall  into  any  mistake  about  it.  There  was 
no  "direct  and  palpable"  interference  with  the  New  York  courts, 
nor  any  interference  at  all.  The  Governor  of  New  York  did  not 
:think  there  was,  nor  did  any  body  else  ever  think  theie  was. 

Mr.  President,  the  honorable  Senator  from  Ohio,  (Mr.  Allev,) 
bestowed,  I  believe,  a  very  considerable  degree  of  attention  upon 
topics  connected  with  the  treaty  of  Washington.  It  so  hap{)ened  that 
my  engagements  did  not  permit  me  to  be  in  the  Senate  during  the 
delivery  of  any  consi*V:  .  ble  portion  of  that  speech.  I  was  in  occa- 
aionally,  however,  und  ueard  some  parts  of  it.  I  have  not  been  able 
to  find  any  particular  account  of  the  honorable  member's  remarks. 
In  the  only  printed  speech  which  I  have  been  able  to  lay  my  hands 
on,  it  is  said  that  he  took  occasion  to  speak,  in  general  terms,  of  va- 
rious topics— enumerating  them— embraced  in  the  treaty  of  1842. 
As  I  have  not  seen  those  lemarks,  I  shall  not  now  undertake  to  make 
any  furtlier  allusion  to  them.  If  I  should  happen  to  see  them  here- 
after, 80  far  as  I  may  believe  that  they  have  not  been  answered  by 
what  I  have  already  said,  or  may  now  say,  I  may,  perhaps,  deem  it 
•worth  while  to  embrace  some  opportunity  of  taking  slich  notice  of 
them  as  to  me  they  may  seem  to  require. 

Mr.  Allen.  I  will  now  state,  for  the  satisfaction  of  the  Senator, 
4he  general  substance  of  what  I  said  on  the  subject.  If  he  so  desires, 
I  will  now  proceed  to  do  so. 

Mr.  Wedster.  I  think  that,  upon  the  whole,  when  the  gentle- 
man shall  furnish  the  public  with  a  copy  of  his  speech,  I  may,  per- 
haps, have  a  more  proper  opportunity  to  pay  attention  to  it,  especially 
as  I  have  to  say  something  of  other  speeches,  which  may  at  present 
occupy  as  much  of  the  time  of  the  Senate  as  can  well  be  devoted  to 
this  subject.     And  now,  sir, paulo  mcijora  canamus. 

An  honorable  r>iember  from  New  York  nearest  the  chair 
<Mr.  Dickinson)  made  a  speech  on  this  subject.  I  propose  to 
take  some  notice  of  that  speech.  But  first  I  must  remark,  that  ihe 
honorable  gentleman  did  not  seem  to  be  satisfied  with  his  own  lightj 
he  borrowed  somewhat  extensively.  He  borrowed,  and  incorporated 
into  his  speech,  by  way  of  a  note,  what  he  en  tides,  "  Extracts  frvm 


52 


the  speech  of  Mr.  C.  J.  ItigersoU,  in  the  House  of  Representatives.^^ 
Well,  then;  my  first  business  is  to  examine  a  little  this  jewel  which 
the  honorable  gentleman  chooses  to  work  into  his  own  diadem;  and 
I  shall  do  it  unmoved  in  temper,  I  hope,  and  at  the  same  time  I  do 
not  mean  to  omit  what  I  may  consider  a  proper  notice  of  the  whole 
of  it,  and  all  its  parts.  And  here,  sir,  is  that  extraordinary  ebullition,, 
called  by  the  honorable  Senator  "  the  speech  of  Mr.  C.J.  Ingeraolly 
in  the  House  of  Representatives." 

Mr.  President,  I  almost  wish  I  could  find  myself  out  of  order  in 
referring  to  it,  as  I  imagine  I  should  be,  if  it  had  not  been  that  the 
honorable  member  has  made  it  his  own  and  a  part  of  his  speech.  I 
should  be  very  glad  to  be  conipeiled  not  to  take  any  notice  of  it — to 
be  told  that  I  was  not  at  liberty  to  know  that  such  a  speech  was  ever 
made  ;  and  should  thank  God  to  know  that  such  an  ebullition  had 
never  been  made  out  of  a  bar-room  anywhere— and  that's  a  theatre 
quite  too  high  for  it.  Now,  sir,  a  large  portion  of  this  '' speech "^ 
seems  to  be  directed  against  the  individual  now  addressing  the  Senate. 
I  will  read  its  parts  and  parcels,  and  take  such  notice  of  them  as  they 
deserve  as  I  go  along.     Hear  what  the  New  York  member  says  : 

Mr.  Dickinson  had  und  ood  there  was  a  correspondence  between  the  authori-^ 
ties  at  Washington  and  the  v.overnor  of  New  York  to  that  effect;  but  he  particularly 
alluded  to  a  letter  addressed  by  Mr.  Webster,  Secretary  of  State,  to  Mr.  Crittenden,  At- 
torney General,  at  that  time,  directing  him  to  proceed  to  H^w  York,  and  take  charge  of 
the  trial  of  McLeod.  He  had  it  not  then  before  him,  and  did  not  lecollect  its  precise 
language,  but  would  refer  to  it  before  he  should  close.  He  would  endeavor  to  speak  of 
the  history  of  the  past  truly,  and  in  perfect  kindness,  but  he  wished  to  show  what  we 
had  gained  by  negotiations  with  Great  Britain,  and  who  had  made  the  concessions." 

Now,  sir,  either  by  way  of  giving  interest  to  this  narrative — or  some- 
thing else — the  gentleman  from  New  York  makes  this  a  little  more 
distinct.  He  says  not  only  that  Mr.  Webster  wrote  this  letter  to  the 
Governor  of  Pievv  York,  with  his  own  hand,  but  that  he  sent  it  by- 
express.  I  believe  the  "  express"  matter  was  expressly  by  the  gen- 
tleman from  New  York. 

Mr.  Dickinson.     Will  you  allow  me? 

Mr.  Webster.     Oh!  yes,  I  will  allow  you. 

Mr.  Dickinson.  The  gentleman  from  New  York  is  not  at  alt 
responsible  for  the  statement  iu  the  note.  Nor  does  the  gentlemaa 
from  New  York  make  the  extracts  from  Mr.  Ingersoll's  speech  any 
part  of  his;  on  the  contrary,  I  stated  expressly,  at  the  titr 


53 


>^ 


it  1 


alluded  to  it  as  a  very  extraordinary  statement.  Having  ct  wilh  the 
emphatic  contradiction  of  the  honorable  Senator  from  Massachusetts, 
or  what  implied  contradiction,  I  proposed  to  read  in  justification  the 
remarks  of  Mr.  Ingersoll.  The  friends  of  the  Senator  in  his  im- 
mediate vicinity  objected  to  have  it  read.  I  did  not  read  the  extract, 
nor  was  it  in  the  report  of  my  speech,  which ,  in  the  usual  way ,  found 
its  wa;-  to  the  newspapers.  But,  as  I  had  repeated  calls  for  what  I 
had  alluded  to  as  spoken  by  Mr.  Ingersoll,  I  did  apj-^nd,  in  the 
pamphlet  edition  of  my  speech,  those  remarks.  I  gave  them  as  they 
were  found  in  the  newspaper,  and  therefore  the  Senator  from  New 
York  neither  added  to,  nor  diminished,  these  remarks.  I  wish  to  set 
the  Senator  right  as  to  this  single  matter  of  ftict. 

Mr.  Webster.  I  have  only  to  state  the  fact  that  the  additional 
falsehood  in  the  speec'i  of  Mr.  Ingersoll,  as  published  by  the  mem- 
ber  from  New  York,  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  published  report. 

Mr.  Dickinson.     In  what  paper? 

Mr.  Webster.  In  the  National  Intelligencer,  as  corrected  by 
Mr.  Ingersoll  himself;  and  so  it  would  appear  that  if  not  inserted  by 
the  member  from  New  York,  there  is  one  falsehood  in  the  case  which 
the  original  authoi  was  not  so  graceless  as  to  retain .  But  I  go  on 
with  this  speech : 

"  Out  of  this  controversy  arose  the  arrest  of  Alexander  McLeod.  What  he  intended 
to  state  now,  consisted  of  facts  not  yet  generally  known,  but  which  would  soon  be  made 
known,  for  they  were  in  progress  of  publication,  and  he  liad  received  them  in  no  confi- 
dence, from  the  best  authority.  Whin  McLeod  was  arrested,  General  Harrison  had 
just  died,  and  Mr.  Tyler  was  not  yet  at  home  as  his  successor.  Mr.  Webster — who 
was  de  facto  the  administration — Mr.  Webster  wrote  to  the  governor  of  New  York, 
with  his  own  hand,  a  letter,  and  sent  it  by  express,  marked  "  private,"  in  which  the 
governor  was  told  that  he  must  release  McLeod,  or  see  the  magnificent  commercial  em- 
I  orium  laid  in  ashes.  The  orilliant  description  given  by  the  gentleman  from  Virginia 
of  the  prospective  destnvtion  of  that  city  in  the  case  of  a  war,  was,  in  a  measure,  anti- 
cipated on  this  occasion  McLeod  must  be  released,  said  the  Secretary  of  State,  or  New 
York  must  be  laid  in  r  «hes.  The  governor  asked  when  this  would  be  done  ?  The  re- 
ply was  fortlimth.  ^Jo  you  not  see  coming  on  the  waves  of  the  sea  the  Paixlian  guns? 
and  if  McLeod  be  i  ot  released.  New  York  will  be  destroyed.  But,  said  the  governor, 
the  power  of  pardon  is  vested  in  me,  and  even  if  he  be  convicted,  he  may  be  pardoned. 
Oh,  no,  said  the  Seen  tai-y,  if  you  even  try  him,  you  will  bring  destruction  on  your- 
selves." 

Well,  now,  sir,  /  say  that  a  series  of  more  direct,  unalloyed  false- 
hoods— absolute,  unqualified, entire— never  appeared  in  anypublica- 
*ion  in  Christendorr .  Every  allegation  here  made — every  one,  would 


54 

entirely  justify  the  use  of  that  expressive  monosyllable,  which 
some  people  are  base  enough  and  low  enough  to  deserve  (o  have 
thrown  in  their  teeth,  but  which  a  gentleman  does  not  often  like 
to  utter.  Every  one  of  them,  from  beginning  to  end,  is  false. 
There  is  not  a  particle  of  truth  in  them — there  is  not  the  slightest 
foundation  for  any  one  of  these  assertions.  ''  Mr.  Webster  wrote  a 
private  letter,"  saying  that  the  ''  Commercial  Emporium  would  be 
h'd  in  ashes  !"  •'  Paixhan  guns!"  False,,sir — all  false.  I  never 
said  or  wrote  such  a  thing  in  my  life  to  the  Governor  of  the  State  of 
New  York.  '' McLeod  must  be  released."  It  is  false.  I  never 
said  any  such  thing.  "New  York  must  be  laid  in  ashes."  It  is 
false.  I  said  or  wrote  no  euch  thing.  "  The  governor  asked  when 
this  was  to  be  done?"  What  does  this  mean?  Why,  it  implies 
that  the  governor  of  New  York  wrote  to  me  a  letter,  in  answer  to 
mine,  inquiring  when  New  York  was  to  be  "laid  in  ashes,"  and  the 
reply  was,  "forthwith."  And  here  we  have  this — Mr.  Ingersoll  him- 
self preparing  this  speech  for  the  press,  italicising  the  word  forthiaith y 
as  if  I  had  written  another  letter  to  the  Governor  of  NewYork,"  telling 
him"  that  New  York  was  to  be  laid  in  ashes  "/or^/iM'?7/j."  "But,, 
said  the  Governor,  the  power  of  pardon  is  vested  in  nie,  and  if  he  be 
convicted  he  may  be  pardoned."  Here  is  another  letter — a  third  let- 
ter tome!  "Oh!  no,  said  the  secretary" — why,  here  I  am  writ- 
ing a. fourth  letter?-— "if  you  even  try  him  you  will  bring  destruction 
upon  yourselves."  This  is  stated  by  a  man,  or  a  thing,  that  has  a  seat. 
in  one  of  the  houses  of  Congress.  I  promised  to  keep  my  temper,, 
and  I  will.  The  whole  concern  is  infinitely  contemptible,  and  can- 
not disturb  the  temper  of  a  reasonable  man.  But  I  will  expose  it,, 
and  let  the  country  see  it.  Such,  then,  are  the  contents  of  the  letters 
which  this  person  describes  as  "facts  not  generally  known,  but  which 
would  soon  be  made  known,  for  they  were  in  progress  of  pubhcation,. 
and  he  had  received  them  in  confidence  from  the  best  authority.'^ 
Well,  I  do  not  know  where  he  got  his  "authority,"  unless,  as  sug- 
gested by  a  fiiend  near  me,  it  was  from  some  chapters  of  his  own 
recent  work!  But  let  me  stale  what  did  occur,  and  prepare  the 
minds  of  the  Senate  for  some  degree  of  astonishment,  that  any  mam 
in  the  world  could  tell  such  a  story  as  this. 

When  Mclieod  was  arrested,  there  was   a  good  deal   of  conver- 
sation in  Washington  and  elsewhere  about  what  would  happen.  It  was. 


m 

i 


65 

a  subject  of  very  considerable  conversation,  and  certainly  of  embar- 
rassment to  the  Government.  It  was  hoped  and  expected  by  me,  and  I 
believe  by  the  Presidentand  other  gentlemen,  that  the  Governor  of  New 
York  would  see  that  it  was  a  case  in  which ,  if  he  were  invested  with  au- 
thority,  by  the  constitution  and  the  laws  of  the  State,  he  would  recom- 
mend the  entering  of  a  nolle  pros,  by  the  prosecuting  officer  of  the 
State  of  New  York.  It  was  expected  that  he  Vvould  do  that,  and 
Gen.  Harrison  one  day  said  to  me,  that  he  had  received  a  letter  from 
a  friend,  in  which  he  was  informed  that  the  Governor  of  New  York 
had  made  up  his  mind  to  take  that  course,  and  thai  he  was  very  glad 
of  it,  as  it  relieved  the  Government.  It  was  about  the  time  that  the 
Attorney  General  was  to  proceed  to  New  York  to  see  how  the  matter 
stood ,  or  perhaps  a  day  or  two  after  he  had  left.  The  case  was  to  be 
tried  immediately,  within  ten  days,  at  Lockport,  in  the  western  part 
of  the  State  of  New  York.  Having  heard  this,  however.  Gen.  Har- 
rison directed  me  to  write  a  note  of  thanks  to  the  Governor  of  New 
York,  stating  that  he  thought  he  had  done  exactly  what  was  proper, 
and  by  so  doing  had  relieved  the  Government  from  some  embarrass- 
ment, and  the  country  from  some  danger  of  collision  with  a  foreign 
power.  And  that  is  every  thing  said  in  that  letter,  or  any  other  letter 
written  by  me  to  the  Governor  of  the  State  of  New  York,  marked 
private.  The  letter  is  here  if  any  one  wishes  to  see  it,  or  to  hear  it 
read . 

Mr.  Crittenden  here  suggested  that  the  letter  should  be  read. 

Mr.  Webster.    Very  well.    Here  it  is,  I  will  read  it. 

(Private.)  Department  of  State,  Washington,  March  11,  1841. 

Mt  dear  sir:  The  President  has  learned,  not  directly,  but  by  means  of  a  letter  from 
a  friend,  that  you  had  expressed  a  disposition  to  direct  a  nolle  prosequi  in  the  case  of  the 
indictment  against  McLeod,  on  being  informed  by  this  Government  that  the  British 
Government  has  officially  avowed  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  as  an  act  done  by  its  own 
authority.  The  Prosident  directs  me  to  express  his  thanks  for  the  promptitude  with 
which  you  appear  disposed  to  perform  an  act,  which  he  supposes  proper  for  the  occasion, 
and  which  is  calculated  to  relieve  this  Government  from  embarrassment,  and  the  coun- 
try from  some  danger  of  collision  with  a  foreign  power. 

You  will  have  seen  Mr.  Crittenden,  whom  I  take  this  occasion  to  commend  to  your 
ki  ndest  regard. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  yours,  truly, 

DANIEL  WEBSTER. 

His  Excellency  Wm.  H.  Seward,  Governor  o/Aeic  York. 

Mr;  Mangum.  Was  that  the  onlv  letter  written? 


56 


Mr.  Webster.  Yes,  the  only  letter;  the  only  private  letter  ever 
written  by  me  to  the  Governor  of  New  York  in  the  world.  Now, 
how  am  I  to  treat  such  allegations  ?  It  is  the  falsehood  '^with  cir- 
cumstance." A  general  statement  might  pass  unregarded;  but  here 
he  quotes  what  he  calls  "the  highest  authority."  He  states  particu- 
lars. He  gives  all  possible  plausible  marks  of  credit  to  the  falsehood. 
How  am  I  to  treat  it?  Why,  sir,  I  pronounce  it  an  utter,  an  abso- 
lute falsehood ,  in  all  its  parts,  from  beginning  to  end.  Now,  I  do 
not  wish  to  use  epithets,  nor  to  call  names.  But  I  hold  up  this  pic- 
ture, which  I  have  painted  faintly,  but  truly;  I  hold  it  up  to  every 
man  in  the  Senate  and  in  the  country,  and  I  ask  him  to  look  at  it, 
and  then  write  at  the  bottom  of  it  any  thing  which  he  thinks  it  most 
resembles. 

The  speech  proceeds:    "The  next  step  taken  by  the  Administra- 
tion was  to  appoint  a  district  attorney,  who  was  to  be  charged  with 
the  defence  of  Alexander  McLeod — the  gentleman  who  was  lately 
removed  from  office — and  a  fee  of  tive  thousand  dollars  was  put  into 
his  hands  for  this  purpose."     False,  sir— false  every  way.     The 
Government  of  the  United  States  had  no  more  to  do  with  the  employ- 
ment of  Mr.  Spencer  for  the  defence  of  McLeod  than  had  the  Gov- 
ernment of  France.     Here  [taking  up  the  corrected  report  of  Mr. 
I. 's  speech,  in  the  Intelligencer]— here  he  says  that,  "enlightened 
by  the  ffentleman  from  New  York,  he  found  he  was  mistaken  on 
this  point."    "Mistaken!"     No  more  mistaken  than  he  was  in  any 
of  his  other  allegations.    "Mistaken!"     No  man  who  makes  such 
statements  is  entitled  to  shelter  himself  under  any  notion  of  mistake. 
His  declaration  in  thisparticular  is  no  more  false ,  nor  any  less  false ,  than 
is  the  declaration  that  the  Government  of  the  United  States  appointed 
an  attorney,  or  charged  their  attorney  with  the  defence  of  McLeod. 
They  never  interfered  in  the  slightest  degree.     It  is  true,  they  fur- 
nished to  Mr.  Spencer,  as  they  would  have  furnished  to  any  other 
counsel,  the  official  correspondence,  to  prove  that  the  Government  of 
Great  Britain  avowed  the  act  of  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline  as 
their  o^^n.     "Application  was  afterwards  made  to  the  chief  justice  of 
the  State  of  New  York  for  the  release  of  McLeod.     The  judge  did 
not  think  proper  to  grant  the  application.     The  marshal  was  about 
to  let  him  go,  when  he  was  told  that  he  must  do  it  at  his  peril;  and 
ihat  if  McLeod  went  out  of  prison,  he  should  go  in."     I  do  not 


♦   > 


57 


know  what  the  marshal  had  to  do  with  the  case.  McLeod  was  iA 
prison  under  the  authority  of  the  State  of  New  York.  I  do  not 
know  how  it  was  possible  that  the  marshal,  an  officer  of  the  United 
States — could  interfere . 

But  there  are  some  other  matters  in  the  speecli  to  which  I  must 
refer.     "  He  would  call  on  the  honorable  member  from  Massa- 
chusetts (Mr.  Adams)  to  sustain  him  in  what  he  was  about  to 
say."     I  do  not  find  that  the  honorable  member  from  Massachusetts 
has  yet  sustained  him  in  these  statements,  and  I  rathSr  think  he 
never  will.     He  asserts  that  1  wrote  to  the  Committee  on  Foreign 
Affairs  of  the  House  on  that  subject,  asking  an  outfit  and  a  salary 
for  a  special  minister  to  England  to  settle  the  Oregon  question.     It 
is  a  falsehood,  as  I  believe.   I  never  wrote  such  a  letter,  to  the  best  of 
my  recollection.    "  These  are  facts,"  he  says,  "  which  no  one  will 
dispute."     I  dispute  them.     I  say  I  have  no  recollection  of  them  at 
all.     I  do  not  believe  Mr.  Adams  has  any  recollection  of  any  such 
note  being  written  by  me.     If  I  had  written  such  a  note,  I  think  I 
should  have  remembered  it.    Well,  now,  this  person  next  proceeds 
to  a  topic  no  way  connected  with  what  he  had  been  discussing.     [Here 
Mr.  W.  read  an  extract  from  the  speech  of  Mr.  Ingersoll,  charg- 
ing him  (Mr.  W.)  with  offering  to  give  Oregon  for  free  trade  with 
England,  in  a  speech  made  at  a  public  dinner,  in  Baltimore,  May, 
1843.]     Here  by  me,  sits  a  Senator  from  Maryland,  (Mr.  Johnson,) 
who  was  present  at  that  dinner,  and  heard  that  speech,  and  if  I  want- 
ed a  witness  beyond  my  own  statement  and  printed  speech,  I  could 
readily  f?.ll  upon  him.     In  that  speech,  I  did  not  mention  Oregon, 
nor  allude  to  Oregon  in  the  remotest  degree.     It  is  an  utter  false- 
hood.   There  can  be  no  mistake  about  it.    The  author  of  this, 
speech  (Mr.  Ingersoll)  was  not  there.    If  he  knew  anything  about 
it,  he  must  have  acquired  his  knowledge  from  the  printed  speech;  but 
in  that  tliere  was  not  the  slightest  reference  to  Oregon — this  is  another 
statement,  therefore ,  just  as  false  as  all  the  rest.   Why ,  sir,  hydrostatic 
pressure  has  no  means  of  condensing  anything  into  such  a  narrow 
compass  as  the  author   of  this  speech  condenses  falsehood.      All 
steam-power  does  not  equal  it.     What  does  he  say  here?    Why, 
that  my  speech  at  Baltimore  contained  a  strong  recommendation  of  a 
commercial  treaty  with  England .   Why ,  sir,  a  commercial  treaty  with 
England  to  regulate  the  subjects  upon  which  I  was  talking  at  Balti- 


58 

more— the  duties  laid  on  goods  by  the  t;vo  countries-was  just  the  thing 
that  I  did  not  recommend,  and  which  I  there  declared  the  treaty- 
making  power  had  no  right  to  njake— no  authority  to  make.  He  would 
represent  me  as  holding  out  the  idea,  that  the  power  of  laying  duties  for 
revenue  was  a  power  that  could  be  freely  exercised  by  the  President 
and  Senate,  as  part  of  the  treaty-making  power !     Why,  I  hope  that 
I  know  more  of  the  Constitution  than  that.     The  ground  I  took  was 
just  the  reverse  of  that— exactly  the  reverse.    Sir,  my  correspondence 
public  andiprivate,  with  England,  at  that  time  led  me  to  anticipate' 
before  long,. some  change  in  the  policy  of  England  with  respect  tJ 
certam    articles,  the  produce  of  this  country— some  change  with 
respect  to  the  policy  of  the  corn-laws.    And   I   suggested  in  that 
speech  how  very  important  it  would  be,  if  things  should  so  tumout,a8 
that  that  great  product  of  our^the  Indian  corn— of  which  we  raided 
fave  times  as  much  as  we  do  of  wheat ;  principally  the  product  of  the 
Westand  Southwest-especially  of  the  State  of  Tennessee,  which  raised 
annually  I  do  not  know  how  many  millions-I  suggested,  I  say,  the 
great  good  fortune  that  would  happen,  if  an  arrangement  could  be 
made  by  which  that  article  of  human  food  could  be  freely  imported 
mto  England.    And  I  said  that,  in  the  spirit  that  prevailed,  and 
which  I  knew  prevailed-I  knew  that  the  topic  had  been  discussed 
m  t.ngland- if  an  arrangement  could  be  made  in  some  proper  man- 
ner to  produce  such  a  result,  it  would  be  a  piece  of  great  good  for- 
tune     But,  then,  di.i  I  not  immediately  proceed  to  say,  that  that 
could  not  be  done  by  treaty?     I  used  the  word  -  arrangement"- 
studiously  used  it-to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  it  could  be  done  bv 
treaty.     I  will  read  what  I  said: 

"But  with  regard  to  the  direct  intercourse'between  us  and  England  great  interest  i^ 
excaednmnywshes  expressed,  and  strong  opinions  entertained  fn  f.vor  of  an  at  er^nl 
to  settle  dut.es  on  certain  articles  by  treaty  or  arrangen^ent.     I  say.  gentlemen   by  ar 
rangernent,.  and  I  use  that  term  by  design.  The  Consthut.on  of  the  uLed  sl^te's  iLes 

r  H     .TT        ^''''  ^"'""''  °^  '"^'"^  '^"'''^^  '°  «"PP°^'  '^^  Government.    It  ha. 
n  ent  ^otl  7  TT  "°"1  °'  ReP-entatives,  the  popular  branch  of  the  Govern- 

Itie    ^at   b  /"/•'      T'^"'"    ^'"'  '"^^  '^^"  ^""^  ^"^^^  --«  -  -hich 

art     ,n/n   ?  into,  having  the  effect  to  limit  duties;  but  it  is  not  neces- 

71^1^,  ?v  ''  '"  ""P"""'""' '''''  "^  *'■''  ''^"'^'  su)>jcct-it  is  nof  necessary  to  go  upon 
deV  r         i        '"'"'  '"  ^"  understanding  with  foreign  governments  upon  rates  of  du- 
ties   that  understanding  can  be  effected  only  by  means  of  a  treaty  ratified  by  the  Presi- 
dent  and  two-thirds  of  the  Senate,  according  to  the  form  of  the  Consutution  ' 
*  *  * 

"  It  is  true  a  treaty  is  the  law  of  the  land.    But,  then,  as  the  whole  business  of  reve- 


ill: 


69 


nue  and  general  provision  for  all  the  wants  of  the  country  is  undoubtedly  a  very  peculiar 
business  of  the  House  of  Representatives  or  of  Congress,  I  am  of  opinion,  and  always 
have  been,  that  there  should  be^o  o'^c  iient  upon  that  power  by  the  exercise  of  the 
treaty-making  power,  unless  in  co'-       .,      .  and  evident  necessity." 

There  have  been  some  c.  '  v  necessity,  like  that  ofFratice  in  the 
case  of  Louisiana.  And  yet  he  says  that  in  this  speech ,  in  which 
Oregon  was  not  mentioned  at  all,  in  which  I  repudiated  altogether  the 
levying  of  revenue  by  the  treaty-making  power,  that  I  recommended 
a  treaty  with  England  in  this  very  speech  for  the  purpose  of  laying  du- 
ties. Sir,  I  grow  weaiy .  weary  with  this  tissue  of  falsehoods.  Why 
should  I  allude  to  representations  .and  imputations  so  groundless? 
And  yet,  sir,  there  is  one  thing  in  the  speech  from  which  I  will 
supplicate  it?  author  to  have  me  excused.  He  says,  he  never 
agreed  with  me  in  politics.  That  is  true.  We  never  did,  and 
1  think  we  never  shall  agree.  He  said,  many  years  ago,  that  if 
he  had  lived  in  the  time  of  the  Revolution ,  he  should  have  been 
a  tory.  I  don't  think  I  should.  He  has  said,  also,  very  recently, 
in  a  printed  book  of  his,  that  the  Declaration  of  Independence  was 
carried  with  difficulty,  if  not  by  accident.  That  is  his  estimate 
of  the  great  charter  of  our  national  existence.  We  should  never 
agree  in  politics  I  admit.  But  he  said,  '-'Mr.  Webster  is  a  man  of 
talents."  Here  I  beg  to  be  excused.  I  can  bear  his  abuse,  but  if 
he  undertakes  my  commendation  I  begin  to  tremble  for  my  reputa- 
tion . 

Sir,  it  would  be  natural  to  ask,  what  can  account  for  all  this  appa- 
rent malice?  Sir,  I  am  not  certain  there  is  any  malice  in  it.  I  think 
it  proceeds  rather  from  a  moral  obtuseness,  a  native  want  of  discrimi- 
nation between  truth  and  falsehood;  or  that  if  there  ever  was  a  glim- 
mering perception  of  that  kind,  a  long  discipline  in  that  subhme 
school  of  morality,  which  teaches  that  '^  all's  fair  in  politics,"  ap- 
pears to  have  completely  obscured  it. 

Hear  him  further  on  the  dismemberment  of  Massachusetts:  ''  By 
this  treaty,"  he  said,  "  the  good  old  Bay  State,  which  he  loved  with 
filial  reverence,  was  disintegrated,  torn  asunder."  ''Massachusetts 
torn  asunder!"  Sir,  Massachusetts  owned  one-half  of  certain  wild 
lands  in  Maine.  By  the  Treaty  of  Washington,  she  parted  with 
these  lands,  at  their  just  value,  and  by  this  she  is  represented  as  dis- 
integrating herself,  tearing  herself  asunder !  Can  absurdity  go  far- 
ther?   But  the  best,  or  the  worst,  of  all  is,  that  the  author  of  this 


eo 


!t| 


speech  loves  the  old  Bay  State  with  filial  reverence  I  He  love  Massa- 
chusetts !  He,  he  love  the  Bay  Slate  !  If  he  loves  Massachusetts,  he  is 
like  the  luckless  swain,  who 

"  Grieves  for  friendship  unreturned, 
"  Or  unregarded  love." 

I  can  tell  him,  sir,  that  Massachusetts  and  all  her  people,  of  all 
classes,  hold  him,  and  his  love,  and  his  veneration , and  his  speeches, 
and  his  principles,  and  his  standard  of  truth,  and  his  value  of  truth,  in 
utter — whatfliall  I  say? — any  thing  but  respect. 

Sir,  this  person's  mind  is  so  grotesque,  so  bizarre — it  is  rather  the 
caricature  of  a  mind,  than  a  mind.  When  we  see  a  man  of  some 
Jcnowledge,  and  some  talent,  who  is  yet  incapable  of  producing  any 
thing  true,  or  useful,  we  sometimes  apply  to  him  a  phrase  borrowed 
from  the  mechanics.  We  say,  there  is  a  screw  loose,  somewhere. 
In  this  case,  the  screws  are  loose  all  over.  The  whole  machine  is  out  of 
order,  disjointed,  ricketty,  crazy,  creaking,  as  often  upside  downasup- 
side  up;  as  often  hurting  as  helping  those  who  use  it,  and  generally 
incapable  of  any  thing,  but  bungling  and  mischief. 

Mr.  President,  I  will  now  take  some  further  notice  of  what  has 
been  said  by  the  member  from  New  York,  (Mr.  Dickinson.)  I  ex- 
ceedingly regret — truly  and  unfeignedly  regret — that  the  observations 
of  the  gentleman  make  it  my  duty  to  lake  some  notice  of  them.  Our 
acquaintance  is  but  short,  but  it  has  not  been  unpleasant.  I  always 
thought  him  a  man  of  courteous  manners  and  kind  feelings,  but  it 
cannot  be  expected  I  shall  sit  here  and  listen  to  statements  such  as  the 
honorable  member  has  made  on  this  (luestion,  and  not  answer  them. 
I  repeat,  it  gives  me  great  pain  to  take  notice  of  the  gentleman's 
speech.  This  controversy  is  not  mine;  all  can  bear  witness  to  that. 
I  have  not  undertaken  to  advance,  of  my  own  accord,  a  single  word 
about  the  treaty  of  Washington.  I  am  forced,  driven  to  it;  and,  sir, 
when  I  am  driven  to  the  wall,  I  mean  to  stand  up  and  make  l)atUe, 
even  against  the  most  formidable  odds.  What  I  find  fault  with  is, 
that  throughout  his  speech,  the  honorable  member  continually  makes 
the  remark  that  he  is  true  to  Uie  history  of  the  past;  he  wishes  to  tell 
the  truth,  that  he  is  making  a  search  after  truth,  and  yet  makes,  in 
fact,  so  much  misstatement.  If  this  be  a  specimen  of  the  honorable 
^Senator's  researches  after  truth,  a  collection  of  his  researches  would 
be  a  very  amusing  compilation.     If  the  honorable  member,  during 


1. 


61 


the  relaxation  from  his  duties  here,  would  put  his  researches  together, 
I  undertake  to  say  they  would  sell  well,  llie  Harpers  would 
make  half  a  fortune  out  of  them.  The  people  of  the  United 
States  will  pay  well  for  what  gives  them  a  good  hearty  laugh; 
and  it  is  no  matter  if  that  efi'ect  be  produced,  whether  it  be  by  a  story 
by  Dickens,  by  a  caricature  from  Punch,  or  a  volume  of  ''  researches 
after  truth/' by  an  honorable  member  from  New  York. 

Now,  sir,  1  propose  to  follow  the  honorable  member  a  few  steps  ia 
the  course  of  his  researches.  I  have  already  said  that  in  two  or  three 
passages  of  his  speech  the  gentleman  expresses  his  strong  desire  to 
state  the  facts.  [Here  Mr.  W.  read  a  quotation  from  the  speech  of 
Mr.  Dickinson.]  He  says  there  are  four  things  we  have  lost  by  the 
treaty  of  Washington.  I  do  not  readily  find  the  passages,  but  the 
amount  is,  that  we  made  a  very  important  concession  of  territory  to 
England  under  that  treaty.  Now, that  treaty  proposed  to  be  a  treaty 
of  concession  on  both  sides.  The  gentleman  states  concessions  made 
by  the  United  States,  but  entirely  forgets,  "in  his  researches  after 
truth,"  to  state  those  made  on  the  other  side.  He  takes  no  notice  of 
the  cession  of  Rouse's  Point;  or  of  a  strip  of  land  a  hundred  miles 
long,  on  the  border  of  the  State  of  New  York.  His  notion  of  histori- 
cal truth  is,  to  state  all  on  one  side  of  the  story,  and  forget  all  the  rest. 
That  is  a  system  of  research  after  truth  which  will  hardly  commend 
itself  to  the  respect  pf  most  men.  But,  sir,  what  I  wish  principally 
to  do  now,  is  to  turn  to  another  part  of  this  speech.  I  before  gave 
the  gentleman  notice  that  I  would  call  upon  him  for  the  authority 
upon  which  he  made  such  a  statement,  as  that  an  attempt  was  made 
at  Washington  by  members  of  the  Government  to  stop  the  course  of 
justice;  and  now,  if  the  gentleman  is  ready  with  the  proofs,  I  would 
be  glad  to  have  them. 

Mr.  Dickinson.  I  will  reserve  what  I  have  to  say  until  the  gen- 
tleman has  done,  when  I  shall  produce  it  to  his  satisfaction . 

Mr.  Webster.  1  undertake  to  say,  no  authority  will  be  produced, 
or  is  producible,  that  there  were  attempts  made  at  Washington  to  in- 
terfere with  the  trial  of  McLeod .  What  occurred  ?  It  was  suggested 
by  the  President  to  Governor  Seward,  that  the  President  was  grati- 
$ed  that  he  had  come  to  the  conclusion  to  enter  a  noUe  prosequi  in 
the  case  of  McLeod .  Was  that  a  palpable  interference  with  judicial 
authority?    Was  that  a  resistance  of  the  ordinary  process  of  law? 


62 

The  Government  of  the  United  States  had  nothing  at  all  to  do 
with  the  trial  of  McLeod  in  the  New  York  courts,  except  (o  see 
that  he  was  furnished  with  the  proof  of  facts  necessary  to  show  his 
defence.     But  I  wish  to  know  in  what  school  the  gentleman  has 
been  taught  that  if  a  man  is  in  prison,  and  his  counsel  moves  to 
have  him  brought  up  on  the  great  writ  of  habeas  corpus,  tliat  that 
is  any  resistance  of  judicial  process  in  favor  of  the  prisoner?      I 
daresay  the  honorable  gentleman  among  his  authorities,  can  pro- 
duce none  to  show  such  to  be  an  interference.     He  may  call  what 
he  likes  a  direct  and  palpable  interference.     He  may  apply  the 
term  to  the  journey  of  the  Attorney  (General  to  Albany,  or  to  any 
other  act  or  occurrence.     But  that  does  not  prove  it  so.     I  hold  the 
gentleman  responsible  to  prove  that  the  Governmem  did  some  act, 
or  acts,  which  the  common-sense  of  men  holds  to  be  a  palpable  and 
direct  interference.     I  say  there  was  none.     He  quotes  the  letter  of 
instructions  to  the  Attorney  General .     That  proposes  no  interference . 
That  letter  says  to  the  Attorney  General,  that  if  the  case  were  pend- 
mg  in  the  courts  of  the  United  States,  so  that  the  President  could 
have  control  over  it,  he  would  direct  the  prosecuting  officer  to  enter 
a  ml.  pros.;  but  as  it  belonged  entirely  to  the  Governor  of  New  York, 
it  is  referred  to  the  Governor  himself.    That  is  the  substance,  in  this 
respect,  of  the  letter  which  the  Attorney  General  carried  to  the  Governor 
of  New  York,  and  there  was  not  another  act  done  by  authority  at  Wash- 
mgton  in  reference  to  this  matter,  and  I  call  upon  the  gentleman  at  his 
leisure  to  produce  his  authority  for  his  statements.     One  word  more  in 
answer  to  the  remarks  the  gentleman  made  this  morning,  and  I  shall 
leave  him.  The  ebullition  which  I  have  been  commenting  upon,  and 
which  IS  as  black  and  foul-mouthed  as  ever  was  ejected  from  any 
thing  standing  on  two  legs,  was  published  a  few  days  before  the  hon- 
orable  member  from  New  York  made  his  speech.     He  referred  to  it, 
and  stated  a  fact  contained  in  it. 

I  was  here  in  my  seat  and  heard  it,  and  I  rose  and  told  the  honora- 
blrimember  it  was  an  utter  falsehood.  He  knew  I  denounced  it  as 
an  absolute  calumny.  He  saw  on  the  face  of  that  statement  that,  if 
It  was  true,  it  was  utterly  disgraceful  to  me.  It  was,  he  said,  dis- 
graceful to  the  country,  what  was  done;  and  if  it  was  disgraceful  to 
the  country,  it  must  be  so  to  me.  I  stated  my  denial  of  the  truth 
-oi  that  speech  of  Mr.  IngersoU  in  the  strongest  terra&-in  the  most 


d3 


emphatic  language.  What  then  ?  The  very  next  day  he  proceed- 
ed to  read  that  speech  in  the  Senate;  but  it  was  objected  to,  and  was 
not  read.  But  afterwards,  as  he  tells  us,  he  sent  his  own  speech  to 
press,  and  inserted  this  speech  of  Ingersoll,  knowing  that  I  had  pro- 
nounced it  a  falsehood .  Yes,  miserable,  calumnious,  and  scandalous 
as  it  was,  he  snatched  at  it  eagerly,  and  put  it  in  his  own  speech,  and 
then  circulated  it  to  the  full  extent  of  his  ability.  I  happened  to  come 
into  this  chamber  one  day  when  the  Senate  was  not  in  session,  and 
found  our  agents  and  messengers  franking  and  directing  that  speech  to 
all  parts  of  New  York;  and  I  do  not  doubt  that  enough  of  it  was  sent 
by  him  into  Broome  county,  and  the  adjacent  counties,  to  fill  a  small 
barn;  and  pretty  bad  fodder  it  would  be.  And  now  I  beg  to  know 
if  that  is  friendly,  candid,  or  just?  Dot  any  man  think  he  can 
stand  up  here  widi  the  proper  dignity  ol  a  Senator  of  the  United 
States,  and  pursue  such  a  course?  He  1  /  the  speech  he  quoted 
was  calunmious.     He  heard  it  pronounced  ..aerly  false. 

Mr.  Dickinson.  Only  one  single  point  in  it  was  answered  or  de- 
nied by  the  Senator.  That  was,  that  the  fee  of  the  Attorney  Gene- 
ral was  not  paid  by  the  Government  of  the  United  States.  I  referred 
to  the  statements  because  I  had  a  right  to  do  it,  and  thinking  it  was 
part  of  my  duty. 

I  do  not  say  what  a  man  has  a  right  to  do 

As  a  matter  of  propriety,  then 


Mr.  Webster. 
Mr.  Dickinson, 
Mr.  Webster. 


Well,  I  say  it  was  not  proper  to  do  it.  Suppose 
I  had  dragged  out  of  a  ditch  some  calumny  on  the  gendeman  which 
be  denied,  would  it  be  pioper  in  me  to  persist  in  it  after  that  denial? 

Mr.  Dickinson.  The  speech  quoted  was  documentary  matter, 
and  I  had  a  right  and  full  liberty  to  lay  such  before  the  country. 

Mr.  Webster.  That  is  true  of  documentary  history,  but  when 
did  that  speech  become  documentary  history  ? 

Mr.  Dickinson.  It  was  considered  so  by  me,  because  it  was 
printed  and  went  to  the  public  from  an  official  source. 

Mr.  Webster.  Indeed!  So  any  falsehood,  any  vile  calumny,  that 
is  raked  up,  no  matter  what  it  is,  if  printed,  is  "documentary  history!" 
The  gentleman's  own  speech,  according  to  that,  is  already  docu- 
mentary history!  Now,  sir,  I  repeat  again,  that  it  has  given  me  pain 
to  be  driven  into  this  controversy — ^great  pain;  but  I  repeat  also  that 
if  I  am  attacked  here  for  any  thing  done  in  the  course  of  my  public 


t  k 


I 


M 


64 

life,  I  shall  defend  myaelf.  My  public  reputation,  be  it  what  it  may, 
has  been  earned  by  thirty  years  service  in  Uiese  halla.  It  is  dearer  to 
me  than  life  itself,  and  till  life  is  extinct  I  will  defend  it. 

I  will  now  allude,  Mr.  President,  as  briefly  as  possible,  to  some 
oUier  provisions  of  the  Treaty  of  Washington.     The  article  for  the 
delivery  of  fugitives  from  jusUce  has  been  assailed.     It  has  been 
said  that  an  innocent  woman  had  been  sent  back  to  Scotland,  under 
its  provisions.  Why,  I  believe  the  fact  is,  that  a  woman  had  murder- 
eU  her  husband,  or  some  reUitive  in  Scotland,  and  fled  to  this  coim- 
try.     She  was  pursued,  demanded,  and  carried  back, and  from  some 
defect  in  the  ordinary  regularity  of  evidence,  or  some  such  cause, 
which  not  unfrequenily  occurs  in  criminal  trials,  she  was  acquitted. 
But,air,  I  undertake  to  say,  that  the  article  for  the  extradition  of  otTen- 
ders,  contained  in  the  treaty  of  1842,  if  there  were  nothing  else  in  the 
treaty  of  any  importance,  has  of  itself  been  of  more  value  to  this  coun- 
try, and  is  of  more  value  to  the  progress  of  civilization,  the  cause  of 
humanity,  and  the  good  understanding  between  nations,  than  could 
be  readily  computed .     What  was  the  state  and  condition  of  this  coun- 
try, sir,  on  the  borders  and  frontiers  at  the  time  of  this   treaty? 
Why,  it  was  the  time  when  the  '^ patriot  societies"  or  '^Hunters* 
Lodges"  were  all  in  operation— when  companies  Avere  formed  and  of- 
ficers appointed  by  secret  associations,  to  carry  on  the  war  in  Canada; 
and  as  I  have  said  already,  the  disturbances  were  so  frequent  and  so 
threatening,  that  the  United  States  Government  despatched  General 
Scott  to  the  frontier  to  make  a  draught  on  New  York  for  militia  in 
order  to  preserve  the  peace  of  the  border.    And  now,  sir,  what  was 
it  that  repressed  these  disorders,  and  restored  the  peace  of  the  border? 
Nothing,  sir,  nothing  but  a  provision  between  the  two  Governments 
that  if  those  ''patriots"  and  "barn-burners"  went  from  one  side  to 
the  other  to  destroy  their  neighbors'  property,  trying  to  bring  on  a  wai- 
all  the  time— for  that  was  their  object— they  should  be  delivered  up 
to  be  punished .    As  soon  as  that  provision  was  agreed  to,  the  disturb- 
ances ceased,  on  one  side  and  on  the  other.     They  were  heard  of  no 
more.     In  the  formation  of  this  clause  of  the  treaty  I  had  the  advan- 
tage of  consultation  with  a  venerable  friend  near  me,  one  of  the  mem- 
hemfrom  Michigan,  [Mr.  Woodbridge.]  He  pressed  me  not  to  fore- 
go the  opportunity  of  introducing  some  such  provision.     He  exara- 
ifted  It;  and  I  will  ask  him  if  he  knows  any  other  cause  for  the  in- 


65 

atantaneoua  suppression  of  these  border  difficulliea  than  this  treaty 
provision  ? 
Mr.  WoorjnnrDGE  rose,  and  said,  in  reply,  as  follows  : 
Mr.  President:  I  may  not  disregard  the  reference  which  the  gen- 
tleman has  done  me  the  honor  to  make  to  me,  m  regard  to  the  in- 
considerable part  which  I  deemed  it  my  duty  to  take,  in  the  matter 
alluded  to.  A  brief  statement  of  some  facts  which  occurred,  and  a 
glance,  simply,  at  the  condition  of  that  border  country  from  which 
I  come,  will  be  all  that  the  occasion  seems  to  demand. 

That  part  of  Canada  with  which  the  people  of  Michigan  are 
brought  more  immediately  in  contact,  extends  from  the  head  of  Lake 
Erie  to  Point  Edwards  at  the  lower  extremity  of  Lake  Theron;  a  dis- 
tance of  about  100  miles.  Along  this  intermediate  distance,  the 
Straits  of  Detroit  and  of  Sinclair,  furnioh  every  imaginable  facility  for 
the  escape  of  fugitives.  For  their  entire  length,  the  shores  of  those 
Straits,  on  either  side,  exhibit  lines  of  dense  and  continuous  settle- 
ment. Their  shores  are  lined,  and  (heir  smooth  surface  covered  with 
boats  and  vessels  of  all  dimensions  and  descriptions — from  the  bark 
canoe,  to  the  steamer  of  a  thousand  tons.  If  the  perpetrator  of  crime 
can  reach  a  bark  canoe,  or  a  light  skiff,  and  detach  himself  from  the 
shore,  he  may  in  a  few  minutes  defy  puiGuit — for  he  will  be  within 
a  foreign  jurisdiction.  In  such  a  condition  of  things  no  society  can 
be  safe  unless  there  be  some  power  to  reclaim  fugitives  from  justice. 
While  your  colonial  government  existed  there,  and  its  executive  ad- 
ministration,  under  the  control  of  this  National  Government,   was 

in  the  hands  of  my  Hon.  colleague,  a  conventional  arrangement 

informal  undoubtedly  in  its  character— was  entered  into  by  him  with 
the  authorities  of  Canada,  sustained  by  local  legislation  on  both 
sides— by  which  these  evils  were  greatly  lessened.  When  the  pre- 
sent State  government  took  the  place  of  the  territorial  government , 
this  arrangement  of  necessity  ceased;  and  then,  the  evils  alluded  to 
were  greatly  aggravated ,  and  became  eminently  dangerous.  Shortly 
before  the  first  session  of  Congress,  at  which  I  attended,  after  the  in- 
auguration of  Gen.  Harrison,  a  very  aggravated  case  of  crime  occur- 
red, and  its  perpetrators,  as  usual,  escaped  into  Canada.  It  was 
made  the  subject  of  an  official  communication  to  the  State  legislature. 
And  soon  after  my  arrival  here,  I  deemed  it  to  be  my  duty  to  lay  the 
5 


66 


matter  before  (he  Secretary  of  Slate,  with  a  view  to  the  adop- 
tion of  some  appropriate  convention  with  Great  Britain. 

The  Hon.  Senator — then  Secretary  of  State — was  pleased  to  receive 
the  suggestion  favorably;  but  suggested  to  me  the  expediency  of  ob- 
taining, if  practicable,  the  sense  of  the  Senate  on  the  subject.  Ac- 
cordingly, I  afterwards  introduced  a  resolution  here,  having  that  ob- 
ject in  view,  and  it  was  referred  to  the  consideration  of  the  Commit- 
tee on  Foreign  Relations — of  which  an  Hon.  Senator  from  Virginia, 
not  now  a  member  of  the  Senate,  was  chairman. 

Mr.  Rives  expressed  himself  very  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  pro- 
position. But,  negotiations  having  been  begun,  or  being  about 
to  commence  with  Lord  Ashburton,  it  was  not  deemed  expedient,  I 
believe,  that  it  should  then  be  made  matter  of  discussion  in  the  Sen- 
ate. I  had  not  ceased  to  feel  very  earnest  solicitude  on  the  subject,- 
and,  as  the  negotiation  approached  its  termination,  Mr.  Webster  did 
me  the  honor  to  send  to  me  the  project  of  that  article  of  the  treaty 
which  relates  to  the  subject.  He  desired  me  to  consider  it  and  to 
exhibit  it,  confidentially  perhaps,  to  such  Senators  as  came  from  bor- 
der States,  for  their  consideration,  and  for  such  modification  of  ita 
terms  and  scope  as  they  might  deem  expedient.  This  I  did.  The 
form  and  scope  of  the  article  met,  I  believe,  with  the  approbation  of 
all  to  whom  I  showed  it.  Nor  was  any  modification  suggested,  ex- 
cept perhaps  one  very  immaterial  one,  suggested  by  an  honorable 
Senator  from  New  York.  Of  all  this  I  advised  Mr.  Webster,  and 
the  project  became  afterwards  an  article  of  the  treaty,  with  but  little 
if  any  variation .  I  believe  lean  throw  no  more  light  on  the  sub- 
ject, sir.  But  the  honorable  Senator,  having  intimated  to  me  that, 
in  his  discussion  of  the  subject,  he  might , perhaps ,  have  occasion  to 
refer  to  the  part  I  took  in  the  matter,  I  have  provided  myself  with 
the  ci  jiy  of  the  message  to  the  Legislature  of  Michigan,  of  which 
I  had  in  the  beginning  made  use,  and  which,  in  order  to  show 
the  extent  of  the  evil  referred  to,  and  the  necessity  which  existed  for 
some  treaty  stipulation  on  the  subject,  I  ask  the  Secretary  to  read.* 


•The  Secretary  here  read  an  extract  from  Mr.  Woodbridge,  when  Governor  of  Mich- 
igan, to  the  legislature  of  that  State,  calling  ita  attention  earnestly  to  the  facilities  whick 
exist  along  the  interior  boundaries  of  the  United  States  for  the  escape  of  fugitives  from- 
justice ;  and  saying,  that  a  very  recent  occurrence,  of  the  most  painful  and  atrocious  cha- 
racter, had  compelled  his  own  attention  to  it,  and  recommending,  in  strong  tenaa,  tiiat 


6T 

(The  extract  having  been  read,  Mr.  W.  then  proceeded;)  I  have 
wow  only  to  add  my  entire  and  unqualified  conviction,  that  no  act  of 
the  legislative  or  treaty-making  power  that  I  have  ever  known,  has 
ever  been  more  successful  in  its  operation  than  this  article  of  the 
treaty;  nor  could  any  provision  have  been  attended  by  more  happy 
consequences  upon  the  peace  and  safety  of  society  in   that  rem.ote 

frontier. 

Mr.  Webster  resumed.  I  am  happy  to  find  that,  in  its  operation, 
the  provision  has  satisfied  those  who.  felt  an  interest  in  its  adoption. 
But  I  may  now  state,  I  suppose  without  offence  and  without  cavil, 
that  since  the  negotia^'on  of  this  treaty,  containing  this  article,  we 
have  negotiated  treaties  with  other  governments  of  Europe  containing 
similar  provisions,  and  that  between  other  governments  of  Europe  them- 
selves, treaties  have  been  negotiated  containmg  that  provision— a  pro- 
vision ne  r  before  known  to  have  existed  in  any  of  the  treaties  be- 
tween European  nations.  I  am  happy  to  see,  therefore,  that  it  has 
proved  itself  to  be  useful  to  the  citizens  of  the  United  States,  for 
whose  benefit  it  was  devised  and  adopted;  that  it  has  proved  itself 
worthy  of  favor  and  imitation  in  the  judgment  of  the  most  enlight- 
ened nations  of  Europe;  and  that  it  has  never  been  complained  of 
by  any  body,  except  by  murderers,  and  fugitives,  and  felons  them- 
selves. 

Now,  sir,  comes  the  matter  of  the  African  squadron,  to  which  I 
am  induced  to  turn  my  attention  for  a  moment,  out  of  sincere  respect 
to  the  member  from  Arkansas,  [Mr.  Sevier,]  who  suggested  the 
other  day  that  to  that  article  he  had  objection.  There  is  no  man 
whose  opinions  are  more  independent  than  those  of  that  gentle- 
man, and  no  one  maintains  them  with  more  candor.  But,  if  I  un- 
derstood him,  he  appears  to  think  that  that  article  gave  up  the  right 
of  search.  What  does  he  mean?  We  never  claimed  that  right. 
We  had  no  such  right  to  give  up  ;  or  does  it  mean  exactly  the  oppo- 
site of  what  he  says— that  ii  yielded  to  England  her  claim  of  such  right? 
No  such  thing.  The  arrangement  made  by  this  treaty  was  designed 
to  carry  into  effect  those  stipulations  in  the  treaty  of  Ghent  which  we 
thought  binding  on  us,  as  well  as  to  effect  an  object  important  to  this 


the  peciUiar  situation  of  Michigan,  in  this  respect,  should  be  laid  before  Congress  with 
a  view  of  urging  the  expediency  of  some  negotiation  on  the  subject,  between  the  United 
Statps  and  England. 


68 

country,  (o  the   interests  of  humanity,  and  to  the  general   cause 
of  cvihzation  throughout  the  world,  without  raising  the  difficuUv 
of  the  right  of  search.      The  object  of  it  was  to '  accomphsh  all 
that,  m  a  way  that  should  avoid  the  possibihty  of  subjecting  our 
vessels,  under  any  pretence,  to  the  right  of  search.     I  will  not  dwell 
on  this.     But  allow  me  to  state  the  sentiments  on  this  subject  of  per- 
sons m  the  service  of  the  United  States  abroad ,  whose  opinions  are  en- 
titled to  respect.     There  is  a  letter  sent  to  the  Department  of  State 
by  Mr.  Wheaton,  dated  Berlin,  November  15th,  1S42      FMr    W 
read  from  this  letter  an  extract  expressive  of  the  writer's  approbation 
of  this  article  of  the  treaty  as  particularly  well  adapted  to  the  end 
proposed,  and  by  which  for  the  first  time  the  policy  of  the  United 
States  m  this  respect  might  be  said  to  have  exercised  a  decided  influ- 
ence upon  that  of  Europe.    Appendix  VII.] 

I  am  quite  willing,  (said   Mr.  W.)   to  rest  on   this   opinion  of 
Mr    Wheaton,  as  to  the  propriety  and  safety,  the  security  and  the 
wisdom  of  the  article  in  this  treaty  respecting  the  suppression  of 
he  African  slave  trade  by  a  squadron  of  our   own,  against   any 
little  artillery  that  may  be  used  against  it  here.     I  beg  the  gentle- 
man s  pardon,  I  did  not  allude  to  his  opinion,  I  have  for  him  the 
highest  respect.     I  was  thinking  of  what  is  said  in  some  of  these 
c^cuments."     But  I  need  not  stop  here.     Upon  the  appearance 
of  th^  treaty  between  the  United  States  and   England,  the  lead- 
ing States  of  Europe  did,  in  fact,  alter  their  whole  policy  on 
this  subject.     The  treaty  of  1841  between  the  Five  Powers  had 
not  been  ratified  by  France.     There  was  so  much  opposition   to 
It  ,n  France,  on  the  ground  that  it  gave  the  right  of  search  to  the 
English  cruisers,  that  the  king  and  M.  Guizot,  though  the  treaty 
was  negotiated   according  to   their  instructions,  did  not  choose  ti 
^tify  It.     I  have  stated  the  cause  of  popular  indignation  against  it. 
Well   what  was  done?     I'll  tell  you.   When  this  treaty  of  Washing- 
ton became  known  in  Europe,  the  wise  men  of  the  two  countries 
who  wished  to  do  all  they  could  to  suppress  the  African  slave-trade 
and  to  do  It  m  a  manner  securing  in  the  highest  degree  the  immunity 
of  the  flag  of  either,  and  the  supremacy  of  neither,  agreed  to  abandon 
the  qu.nrtuple  treaty  of  1841_the  unratified  treaty-t hey  gave  it  up. 
i  hey  adopted  the  treaty  of  Washington  as  thei'r  model ;  and  I  have 
now  in  my  hand  the  convention  between  France  and  England ,  signed  ir. 


•    > 


69 

Lon  d  on  on.he  29.h  May ,  1 845,  .he  article,  of  which ,  i„  reaped  to  .he 
n>a„ner  of  pu.Ung  an  e„<l  .o  .he  slave  trade  embody,  ekcly,  .he  Ivi! 
8.0ns  conunncd  .n  the  ,rea.y  of  Washington.  Thu.  it  ilseen  Z. 
Wance  has  borrowed,  fro,«  the  treaty  stipulatioirs  between  .he  U„  rf 

ptlri  e      '        '       '»'"'«»"'"«l«"iherownd..,iesa„d  ac"^ 
p hslnng  her  own  purpose,  ,n  perfec.  accordance  wi.h  .he  i,n,n„ni.y  of 

n    ,  f  •,        K       ""^  "^''''■'  *"'  ^'"""^  '^  *^  "-"» >vhich  was  ear- 
liest, and  has  been  most  constantly  wakeful ,  in  her  jealousy  of  .he  s„- 

,stead,:y,f„r  cen.ur.es.    The  immunity  of  flags  is  a  deep  principle- 
rFrnr''r.T'™'"''""'"^''''''P^'^'°"'''"''''''*%eople' 

hos,de  .0  anyex.e„s,on  of  .he  right  of  maritime  search  or  visit,  u^der 
ar,y  pretences  whatever,  has  seen,  in  the  exa.nple  of  the  tr  a.y  of 
Wash,ng.on  a  mode  of  fulfilling  her  duties,  for  the  supp.essio^  of 

her  tl"r  ' ''"''°"'  ''""'*'"=  "''  "'°^'  '»"'i''-  °f  -"    . 

Allow  me,  sir,  lo  read   the  S  and  9  articles  of  the  .rea.y  of 
Washmgu,,,,  and  .ho  Is.,  2d,  and  3d  ar.icles  of  ,he  conven.ion  be- 

peni  VUL]  ""'  ^""'"-  ^'"-  ''' '  ''"'  """  "'™'"'  "''  ^P" 
Mr.  Presi^dent,  there  is  another  topic  on  which  I  have  to  say  a  few 
words.  I.  has  been  said  .ha.  .he  Irealy  of  Washington ,  and  Ihe  ne- 
go.,a.,ons  accompanying  it,  leave  .he  great  and  interesting  question  of 
unpressmen.  where  they  found  it,  W,h  all  humility  anti  modesty, 
I .  u  t  beg  to  ex-press  my  dissent  from  tha.  opinion.    I  mus.  be  per- 

of  hat  .,ea.y,  although  unpressmen,  was  not  in  the  treaty  itself,  has, 
tt  the  ,„dgme„t  of  the  world,  or  at  least  of  considerable  arid  re- 
spectable persons  ,n  the  world,  been  regarded  as  not  having  left  .he 
trrr.     ""P'"'^'"™'  «'!«"'  "f<»">J  i'^l'u'as  having  advanced  the 

Twf,  '"V,"  °T"'°"  '°  "' '"  "  ''«•''""<'  "™?«-  foundation. 
Tl  letter  addressed  on  that  subject  from  the  Depar.me„.  of  S.a.e, 
•0  the  Br,t,sh  plenipotentiary,  and  his  answer,  are  among  the  papers 
nly  w,sh  the  letter  ,0  be  read.  I.  recites  the  general  history  of  ,h. 
question  between  England  and  ,he  United  States.  Lord  Adlrburton 
had  no  authority  to  make  stipulalions  on  Ihe  subject;  but  that  is  acir- 

cumslancewhiclildonntif^rp,  |,„.„-,  i -1- -  -,  .  ,        ? 

ii-.  ir^,!* .,  necau=e  i  ilu  nut  ueem  the  stibjeci. 


t 


[H    J 


70 

Qs  one  at  all  proper  for  treaty  stipulation.  [Mr.  W.  here  read  extracts 
from  the  letter,  and  among  others  this:]     (Appendix  IX.) 

"  In  the  early  disputes  between  the  two  Governments,  on  this  so  long  contested  to- 
pic, the  distinguished  person  to  whose  hands  were  first  intrusted  the  seals  of  this  De- 
partment declared,  that  "  the  simplest  rule  will  be,  that  the  vessel  being  American  shall 
*  :  evidence  that  the  seamen  on  board  are  such. 

"  Fifty  years'  experience,  the  utter  failure  of  many  negotiations,  and  a  careful  recon- 
sideration now  had  of  the  whole  subject,  at  a  moment  when  the  passions  are  laid,  and 
no  present  interest  or  emergency  exists  to  bias  the  judgment,  have  fully  convinced  this 
Government  that  this  is  not  only  the  simplest  and  best,  but  the  only  rule  which  can  be 
adopted  and  observed,  consistently  with  the  rights  and  honor  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  security  of  their  citizens.  That  rule  announces,  therefore,  what  will  here- 
after be  the  principle  maintained  by  their  Government.  In  every  regularly  docu- 
mented American  merchant  vessel,  the  crew  who  navigate  it  will  find  their 

PROTECTION  IN  THE  FLAG  WHICH  IS  OVER  THEM." 

And  then  proceeded :  This  declaration  will  stand .  Not  on  account 
of  any  particular  ability  displayed  in  the  letter  with  which  it  concludes; 
fitill  less  on  account  of  the  name  subscribed  to  it.  But  it  will  stand, 
because  it  announces  the  true  principles  of  public  law;  because  it 
announces  the  great  doctrine  of  the  equahty  and  independence 
of  nations  upon  the  seas;  and  because  it  announces  the  determination 
of  the  Government  and  the  people  of  the  United  States  to  uphold 
those  principles,  and  to  maintain  that  doctrine,  through  good  report 
and  through  evil  report,  forever.  We  shall  negotiate  no  more,  nor 
attempt  to  negotiate  more,  about  impressment.  We  shall  not  treat, 
hereafter,  of  its  limitation  to  parallels  of  latitude  and  longitude.  We 
shall  not  treat  of  its  allowance,  or  disallowance,  in  broad  seas, or  nar- 
row seas.  We  shall  think  no  more  of  stipulating  for  exemption  from 
its  exercise,  of  some  of  the  peisons  composing  crews.  Henceforth ,  the 
deck  of  every  American  vessel  is  inaccessible,  for  any  such  purpose. 
It  is  protected ,  guarded ,  defended ,  l)y  the  declaration  which  I  have  read , 
and  that  declaration  will  stand . 

Sir,  another  most  important  question  of  maritime  law,  growing  out 
of  the  case  of  the  "  Creole,"  and  other  similar  cases,  was  the  subject 
of  a  letter  to  the  British  plenipotentiary,  and  of  an  answer  from  him. 
An  honorable  member  from  South  Carolina,  (Mr.  Calhoun,)  had 
taken,  as  is  well  known, a  great  interest  in  the  matter  involved  in  that 
question.  He  had  expressed  his  opinion  of  its  importance  here,  and 
had  been  sustained  by  the  Senate.  Occasion  was  taken  of  Lord  Ash- 
burton's  mission  to  communicate,  to  him  and  to  his  Government, 


y 


'^ 


71 


y 


the  opinions  whicli  this  Government  entertained  ;  and  I  would  now 
ask  the  honorable  member  if  any  similar  cause  of  complaint  has  since 
arisen.  [Mr.  Calhoun  said  he  had  heard  of  none.]  I  trust,  sir,  that 
none  will  arise  hereafter.  I  refer  to  the  letter  to  Lord  Ashburto'n  on 
this  subject,  as  containing  what  the  American  Government  regarded 
as  the  true  principle  of  the  maritime  law,  and  to  his  very  sensible  and 
proper  answer. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  reached  the  end  of  these  remarks,  and  tho 
completion  of  my  purpose ;  and  I  am  now  ready ,  sir,  to  put  the  ques- 
tion  to  the  Senate,  and  to  the  country,  whether  the  northeastern  boun- 
dary has  not  been  fairly  and  satisfactorily  settled ;  whether  proper  satis- 
faction and  apology  have  not  been  obtained,  for  an  aggression  on  the 
soil  and  territory  of  the  United  States;  whether  proper  and  safe  stip- 
ulations have  not  been  entered  into,  for  the  fulfilment  of  the  duty  of 
the  Government,  and  for  meeting  the  earnest  desire  of  the  people,  in 
the  suppression  of  the  slave  trade;  whether,  in  pursuance  of  these 
stipulations,  a  degree  of  success,  in  the  attainment  of  that  object,  has 
not  been  reached,  wholly  unknown  before  ;  whether  rrimes,  disturb- 
mg  the  peace  of  nations,  have  not  been  suppressed  ;  whether  tho 
safety  of  the  southern  coasting  trade  has  not  been  secured  ;  whether 
impressment  has  not  been  struck  out  from  the  list  of  contested  ques- 
tions among  nations;  and  finally,  and  more  than  all,  whether  any 
thing  has  been  done  to  tarnish  the  lustre  of  the  American  name  and 
character  ? 

Mr.  President ,  my  best  services,  like  those  of  every  other  good 
citizen,  are  due  to  my  country  ;  and  I  submit  them, and  their  results,, 
in  all  humility,  to  her  judgment.  But  standing  here,  to  day,  in  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States,  and  speaking  in  behalf  of  the  Adminis- 
tration of  which  I  formed  a  part,  and  in  behalf  of  the  two  Houses  of 
Congress,  who  sustained  that  Administration ,  cordially  and  effectu- 
ally, in  every  thing  relating  to  this  day's  discussion,  I  am  willing  to- 
appeal  to  the  public  men  of  the  age,  whether,  in  1842,  and  in  the 
city  of  Washington,  something  was  not  done  for  the  suppression  of 
crime,  for  the  true  exposition  of  the  principles  of  public  law,  for  Uie 
freedom  and  security  of  commerce  on  the  ocean, and  for  the  peace  of 
the  world  ? 


> 


I 


m 


APPENDIX 


TO 


MR.  WEBSTER'S  VINDICATION 


OF   THE 


TREATY  OF  WASHINGTON. 


APPENDIX. 


I. 

■Mr.  Everett  to  Mr.  Jre6i/er.— [Extracts.] 

Legation  or  the  TJnited  States, 

London,  December  31,  1841. 

A  ' 

At  a  late  l.our  on  the  evening  of  the  26th,  I  received  a  note  from  the  Ear!  of  Aber. 
^een,  requesti..g  an  interview  for  the  following  day,  when  I  met  him  at  the  Foreign  Of. 
flee,  agreeably  ,o  the  appomtment.  After  one  or  two  general  remarks  upon  the  difficulty 
of  bnnging  about  an  adjustment  of  the  points  of  controversy  between  the  Governments 
by  a  contmuance  of  the  discussions  hitherto  carried  on,  he  said  that  Her  Majesty's  Go* 
vernment  had  determined  to  take  a  decisive  step  towards  that  end,  by  sending  a  special 
niimsteMo  the  United  States,  with  a  fujl  power  to  make  a  final  settlemeht  of  all  matters 

This  step  was  determined  on  from  a  sincere  and  earnest  desire  to  bring  the  matter  so 
long  m  controversy  to  an  am.cable  settlement;  and  if,  as  he  did  not  doubt:  the  same  dis! 

indeed,  the  only  means  of  carrying  it  into  effect.  In  the  choice  of  the  individual  for  the 
m.s.on,  L0.X1  Aberdeen  added,  that  he  had  been  mainly  influenced  by  a  desire  to  si 

qualified  for  the  trust,  and  that  he  persuaded  himself  he  had  found  one  who,  in  both  re- 

spects was  all  that  could  be  wished.     He  then  named  Lord  Ashburton,  who  had  con- 

aented  to  undertake  the  mission. 

Although  this  communication  was  of  course  wholly  unexpected  to  me,  I  felt  no  hesi- 

tation  m  expressing  the  great  satisfaction  wuh  which  1  received  it.     I  assured  Lord 

Aberdeen,  that  the  President  had  nothing  more  at  heart  than  an  honorable  adjustment  of 
he  mat  ers  m  discussion  between  the  two  countries ;  that  I  was  persuaded  a  more  accep- 
ab  e  se  eetion  of  a  person  for  the  important  mission  proposed  could  not  have  been  made ; 

and  that  1  anticipated  the  happiest  results  from  this  overture. 
Lord  Aberdeen  rejoined,  that  it  was  morl  than  an  overture;  that  Lord  Ashburton 

be  weer7thl    '  '"""  '"^"''''  '  '''""''^"  arrangement  on  every  point  in  discussion 

liffi  ,       r    H     ,""7"^    ""  '-""'''  ""  '-'^'''^  °f--ch,  which  he  deemed  tlie  most 

Lord  A  f.      /  ■"  ''"  "'"'"^'  *'  '""^'^^ '''''  ""'*  •■^"  "''-'•  "-'"--^  '"  controversy  to 

clefo  ";'"""""•     '''  ^''''^''•'"^  '"^'>' ^'"'""l  '--  '-"  quite  wilhng  to 

come  to  a  general  arrangement  here,  but  they  supposed  I  had  not  full  powers  for  such  a 

This  measure  being  determined  on,  Lord  Aberdeen  said  he  presumed  it  would  be  hai-d- 

y  worth  whde  for  us  to  continue  the  correspondence  here,  on  matters  in  dispute  between 

governments.     He,  of  course,  was  quite  willing  to  consider  and  rcnly  to  any  sta'e- 

meiHl  nught  thmk  proper  to  make  on  any  subject;  but,  pending  the  negotiations  that 

might  take  oai'p  [If  Wwi-"i<j-*nM   iis> -■,,,^,        i       ■        »         .-         f 

.  ,•         .       '  *   -^■^■•..'g'0,1,  :ie  sup^jjscd  no  ucaeiit  ooulu  result  from  a  simiiluineous 

tiiscussion  here. 


76 

« 

II. 

Mr.  Wtbster  lo  Mr.  Everett.— [Exrn act.] 

DEI'AnTMCN-T    OF    StATE. 

IViisliin'^ton,  January  29,  1942. 
'•Ti  Prrsiiicnt  has  rt-ad  Lonl  Aberdeen's  note  to  you  of  the  20tli  of  December  in 
reply  to  Mr.  Stevenson'H  note  to  Lonl  Palmeraton  of  tlie  t21st  of  October,  and  thinks  you 
■were  quite  right  in  acknowledging  the  dispnsNionate  tone  of  that  paper.  It  is  only  by  the 
exercise  of  calm  reason  that  truth  can  be  arrived  at,  in  (luestions  of  a  conipli.  ated  nature; 
and  between  Slates,  each  of  which  understands  and  respects  the  intelligence  and  the 
power  of  tlie  other,  there  ought  to  be  no  unwillingness  to  follow  its  guidance.  Ai  the 
present  day.  .,.)  Stute  is  so  high  us  that  the  principles  of  its  intercourse  with  otiicr  na- 
tions are  above  question,  or  its  conduct  above  scrutiny.  On  the  contrary,  the  whole  civi- 
lized world,  now  vastly  better  informed  on  such  sulijects  than  in  former  ages,  and  alive 
and  sensible  to  the  principles  adopted  and  the  purposes  avowed  by  the  leading  States, 
necessarily  constitutes  a  tribunal,  august  in  character  and  formidable  in  its  d'ecisions! 
And  it  is  before  this  tribunal,  and  upon  the  rules  of  natural  justice,  moral  [rropriety,  tlie 
usages  of  modwn  times,  and  the  prescriptions  of  public  law,  that  Governments  which 
respect  themselves  and  respect  their  neighbors  must  be  prepared  to  discuss,  witii  candor 
and  with  dignity,  any  topics  wliich  may  have  caused  difle.enccs  to  sf.ring  up  between 
them. 

"Your  despatch  of  the  31st  December  announces  the  important  intelligence  of  a  spe- 
cial minister  from  England  to  the  United  States,  with  full  powers  to  settle  every  matter 
in  dispute  between  the  two  Governments;  and  he  President  directs  me  to  say,  that  he 
regards  this  proceeding  as  originating  in  an  entirely  amicable  spirit,  and  that  it  will  be 
met,  on  his  part,  with  perfectly  corresponding  sentiments.  The  high  character  of  Lord 
Ashburton  is  well  known  to  this  Government;  and  it  is  not  doubted  that  he  will  enter 
on  the  duties  assigned  him,  not  only  with  the  advantages  of  much  knowledge  and  expe- 
rience in  public  aftairs,  but  with  a  true  desire  to  signalize  his  mission  by  "assisting  to 
place  the  peace  of  the  two  countries  on  a  permanent  basis.  He  will  be  received  witli 
the  respect  due  to  his  own  chai-acter,  the  character  of  the  Government  which  sends  him, 
and  the  high  importance,  to  both  countries,  of  the  subjects  intrusted  to  his  negotiation. 

"The  President  approves  vour  conduct,  in  not  pursuing,  in  England,  the  discussion  of 
questions  which  are  now  to  become  the  subjects  of  negotiation  here." 


I 


III. 

Mr.    Webster  to  Gov.  Fairfield. 

Depart.me.vt  of  State, 

Washington,  Uth  Jpril,  1842, 
Your  excellency  is  aware  that,  previous  to  March,  1341,  a  negotiation  had  been  going 
on  for  some  time  between  the  Secretary  of  State  of  the  United  Suites,  under  the  direc- 
tion of  the  President,  and  the  British  minister  accredited  to  this  Government,  liaving  for 
its  object  the  creation  of  a  joint  commission  for  settling  the  controversy  respecting  the 
northeastern  boundary  of  the  United  States,  with  a  provision  for  an  uUimate  reference  to 
arbitrators,  to  be  appointed  by  some  of  the  sovereigns  of  Euroj^c,  in  case  an  arbitration 


I 


should  become  necessary.  On  the  leading  features  of  a  convention  for  this  purpose  the 
two  Governments  were  agreed ;  but,  on  several  matters  of  detail,  the  parties  differed, 
and  appear  to  have  been  interchanging  their  respective  views  and  opinions,  projects  and 
counter-projects,  witiuiut  coming  to  a  final  arrangement,  (/own  to  Augtist,  1840.  Vari- 
ous causes,  not  now  necessary  to  be  explained,  arrested  the  progress  of  the  negotiation 
at  that  time,  and  no  considcral)le  advance  has  since  been  made  in  it. 

It  seems  to  have  been  understood  on  both  sides  that,  one  arbitration  having  failed,  it 
was  the  duty  of  the  two  parties  to  proceed  to  institute  another,  according  to  the  spirit  of 
the  treaty  of  Ghent  and  other  treaties  ;  and  the  President  has  felt  it  to  be  his  duty,  un- 
less  some  new  course  should  be  proposed,  to  cause  the  negotiation  to  be  resumed,  and 
pressed  to  i's  conclusion.  But  I  have  now  to  inform  your  excellency  that  Lord  Ashbur- 
ton,  a  minister  plenipotentiary  and  special,  has  arrived  at  the  seat  of  the  Government  of 
the  United  States,  charged  with  full  powers  from  his  sovereign  to  negotiate  and  settle 
the  different  matters  in  discussion  between  the  two  Governments.  I  have  further  to 
state  to  you,  that  he  has  officially  announced  to  this  Department  tliat,  in  regard  to  the 
boundary  question,  he  has  authority  to  treat  for  a  conventional  line,  or  line  by  agree- 
ment, on  such  terms  and  conditions,  and  with  such  mutual  considerations  and  equiva- 
lents, as  may  be  thought  just  and  equitable,  and  that  he  is  ready  to  enter  upon  a  negotia- 
tion for  such  conventional  line,  so  soon  as  this  Government  shall  say  it  is  authorized  and 
jeady,  on  its  part,  to  commence  such  negotiation. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  President  has  felt  it  to  be  his  duty  to  call  the  serious 
attention  of  the  Governments  of  M:iine  and  Massachusetts  to  the  subject,  and  to  submit 
to  those  Governments  the  propriety  of  their  co-operation,  to  a  certain  extent,  and  in  a 
certain  form,  in  an  endeavor  to  terminate  a  controversy  already  of  so  long  duration,  and 
which  seems  very  likely  to  be  still  considerably  further  protracted  before  the  desired  end 
of  a  final  adjustment  shall  be  attained,  unless  a  shorter  course  of  arriving  at  that  end  be 
adopted  than  such  as  has  heretofore  been  pursued,  and  as  the  two  Governments  are  still 
pursuing. 

Yet,  v.ithoul  the  concurrence  of  the  two  States  whose  rights  arc  more  immediately 
concerned,  both  having  an  interest  in  the  soil,  and  one  of  them  in  the  jurisdiction  and 
government,  the  duty  of  this  Government  will  be  to  adopt  no  new  course,  but,  in  com- 
pliance with  treaty  stipulations,  and  in  furtherance  of  what  has  already  been  done,  to 
hasten  the  pending  negotiations  as  fast  as  })ossible. 

But  the  President  thinks  it  a  highly  desirable  object  to  prevent  the  delays  necessarily 
incident  to  any  settlement  of  the  question  by  these  means.  Such  delays  are  great  and 
unavoidable.  It  has  'n.'en  found  that  an  exj.loration  and  examination  of  the  several  lines 
constitute  a  work  of  tlaee  years.  The  existing  commission  for  making  such  exploration, 
under  the  authority  of  the  United  States,  has  been  occupied  two  summers,  and  a  very 
considerable  portion  of  the  work  remains  still  to  be  done.  If  a  joint  commission  should 
be  appointed,  and  should  gu  through  the  same  work,  and  the  commissioners  sliould  dis- 
agree, as  is  very  po.ssible,  and  an  arbitration  on  that  account  become  indispensable,  the 
arbitrators  might  find  it  necessary  to  make  an  exploration  and  survey  themselves,  or 
cause  tlie  same  to  be  done  by  others  of  their  own  appointment.  If  to  these  causes,  ope- 
ratiiii;  to  postpone  the  final  decision,  be  added  the  time  necessary  to  apj^oint  arbitrators, 
and  for  their  preparation  to  leave  Europe  for  the  service,  and  the  various  retardin;;:  inci- 
dents always  attending  such  operations,  seven  or  eight  years  constitute  perhaps  the  short- 
est period  within  which  we  can  look  for  a  final  result.  In  the  mean  time,  great  expenses 
have  been  incurred,  a;ul  further  expenses  cannot  be  avoided.    It  is  well  known  that  the 


78 


controversy  lias  brought  heavy  charges  upon  iMaine  herself,  to  ihc  re munrration  or  pro- 
per  settlement  of  which  she  cannot  be  expected  to  be  indifferent.  The  exploration  by 
the  Qovernmrnt  of  the  United  States  haH  already  rest  a  hundred  thou.wnd  dollars  and 
the  charf,'e  of  another  summer'^  work  is  in  prospect.  Ti.ese  facts  may  he  sufficient  to 
form  a  probable  estimate  of  the  whole  expen.se  likely  to  be  incurred  before  the  contro- 
versy  can  be  settled  by  arbitration;  and  our  experience  admonishen  us  that  even  anotlier 
arbitration  mii,'}it  possibly  fail. 

The  opinion  of  this  Government  K]pon  the  justice  and  validity  of  the  American  claim 
has  been  expressed  at  so  many  times,  and  in  so  many  fonns,  that  a  repetition  of  that 
opinion  IS  not  necessary.  But  the  subject  is  a  subject  in  dispute.  The  Government  has 
agreed  to  make  it  matter  of  reference  and  arbitration ;  and  it  must  fulfil  that  n..reement 
unless  another  mode  for  settling  the  controversy  should  be  resorted  to,  with  the"  Jiope  of 
producmg  a  speedier  decisio.,.  The  President  proposes,  then,  that  the  Governments  of 
Maine  and  Massachusetts  should  severally  appoint  a  commissioner  or  commissioners 
empowered  to  confer  with  the  authorities  of  this  Government  upon  a  conventional  line' 
or  Ime  by  agreement,  with  its  terms,  conditions,  considerations,  and  equivalents,  with  an 
understandmg  that  no  such  line  will  be  agreed  upon  without  the  assent  of  such  commis- 
sioners. 

This  motlc  of  proceeding,  or  some  other  which  shall  express  assent  beforehand,  seems 
indispensable,  ,f  any  ne^^o.iation  for  a  conventional  line  is  to  be  had ;  since,  if  happily  a 
treaty  should  be  the  result  of  the  negotiation,  it  can  only  be  submitted  to  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States  for  ratification. 

It  is  a  subject  of  deep  and  sincere  regret  to  the  President,  that  the  British  plenipoten- 
tiary  did  not  arrive  in  the  country  and  make  known  his  powers  in  time  to  have  made 
this  communication  before  the  annual  session  of  the  Legislatures  of  the  two  States  had 
been  brought  to  a  close.     He  perceives  and  laments  the  inconvenience  which  may  be 
experienced  from  reassembling  those  Legislatures.     But  the  British  mission  is  a  special 
one ;  it  does  not  supersede  the  resident  mi-ssion  of  the  British  Government  at  Washington 
and  Its  stay  m  the  United  States  is  not  expected  to  be  long.     In  addition  to  these  consid- 
erations, it  is  to  be  suggested  that  more  than  four  months  of  the  session  of  Con-ress  have 
already  passed,  and  it  is  highly  desirable,  if  any  treaty  for  a  conventional  line  should  be 
agreed  on,  it  should  be  concluded  before  the  session  shall  terminate,  not  only  because  o*" 
the  necessity  of  the  ratification  of  the  Senate,  but  also  because  it  is  not  impcssible  that 
measures  may  be  thought  advisable,  or  become  important,  which  can  only  be  accom- 
plished by  the  authority  of  both  House-. 

These  considerations,  in  addition  to  the  importance  of  the  subject,  and  a  firm  convic- 
tion  in  the  mind  of  the  President  that  the  interests  of  both  countries,  as  well  as  the  inter- 
ests of  the  two  States  more  immediately  concerned,  require  a  prompt  effort  to  bring  this 
dispute  to  an  end,  constrain  him  to  express  an  earnest  hope  that  your  excellency  will 
convene  the  Legislature  of  Maine,  and  submit  the  subject  to  its  grave  and  candid  delibe- 
rations, lam,  &c., 

„.   ^      „  DANIEL  WEBSTER. 

His  Excellency  John  Fairfield, 

Governor  of  Maine. 


79 


IV. 

Captain  Talcott  to  Mr.  Wtksler. 

Wasbincton,  JrUy  14,  1843. 
:Jii»:  The  lerritory  within  the  lines  mentioned  by  you  contiuns  eight  hundred  and  nine- 
.ythret  square  nr.iles,  equal  to^.e  hundred  and  mentyone  thousand  five  hu,ulred  a,ul  tx,entu 
acrea.  It  »  a  long  and  narrow  tract  upon  the  mount-uns  or  highlands,  the  distance  from 
Uakc  Pohenogamook  to  the  Mcijarmette  portage  being  one  hundred  and  ten  miles  The 
territory  is  barren,  and  without  timber  of  value,  and  I  should  estimate  that  nineteen 
parts  out  of  twenty  arc  unfit  for  cultivation.  Along  eighty  miles  of  this  territory  the 
highlands  throw  up  into  irregular  eminences,  of  different  lieighls,  and,  though  observine 
a  general  northeast  and  southwest  direction,  are  not  brought  well  into  line.  Some  of  the 
elevations  are  over  three  tirousand  feet  above. the  sea. 

The  formation  is  primitive  siliceous  rock,  with  slate  resting  upon  it,  around  the  basis. 
Between  the  eminences  are  morasses  and  swamps,  throughout  which  beds  of  moss  of 
luxuriant  growtli  rest  on  and  cover  the  rocks  and  earth  beneath.  The  growth  is  such  as 
IS  usual  in  mountain  regions  on  this  continent,  in  high  latitudes.  On  some  of  the  r'dges 
and  eminences  birch  and  maple  are  found  ;  on  others,  spruce  and  fir;  and,  in  the  swamps, 
spruce  intermixed  with  cedar;  but  the  wood  everywhere  is  insignificant,  and  of  stinted 
growth.  It  will  readily  be  seen,  therefore,  that  for  cultivation,  or  as  capable  of  furnish- 
ing the  means  of  human  subsistence,  the  lands  are  of  no  value. 
I  am,  sir,  your  obedient  servant, 

Tinn   n.w.».  ixr  c      .         „  «  ^'  TALCOTT,  Commissioner. 

Won.  Daniel  Webster,  Secretary  of  State. 


V. 

,    Mr.   Webster  to  Lord  ^i/iAur/on.— [Extract.] 

Department  of  State, 

fVushington,  July  27,  1842. 
The  act  of  which  the  Government  of  the  United  States  complains  is  not  to  be  con- 
sidered as  justifiable  or  unjustifiable,  as  the  question  of  the  lawfulne.ss  or  unlawfulness  of 
the  employment  in  which  the  "  Caroline"  was  engaged  may  be  decided  the  one  way  or 
the  other.     That  act  is  of  itself  a  wrong,  and  an  offence  to  the  sovereignty  and  dignity 
of  the  United  States,  being  a  violation  of  their  soil  and  territory— a  wrong  for  which 
to  this  day,  no  atonement,  or  even  apology,  has  been  made  by  her  majesty's  Govern- 
ment.   Your  lordship  cannot  but  be  aware  that  self-respect,  the  consciousness  of  inde- 
pendence and  national  equality,  and  a  sensitiveness  to  wliatever  may  touch  the  honor 
of  the  country— a  sensitiveness  which  this  Government  will  ever  feel  and  ever  cultivate 
—make  this  a  matter  of  high  importance,  and  I  must  be  allowed  to  ask  for  it  your  lord- 
ship's grave  consideration. 
I  have  the  honor  to  be,  my  lord,  your  lordship's  most  obedient  servant, 
,  .  DANIEL  WEBSTER. 

jLORD   AsHBrRTON,  &C.,  &C.,  &C. 

Lord  Mibiirlon  to  Mr.  Webster.— [Extract  ] 

WashinStok,  .My  28,  1842. 
Although  it  is  believed  that  a  candid  and  impartial  consideration  of  the  whole  history 


80 


of  this  unfortunate  event  will  lead  to  the  conclusion,  that  there  were  grounds  of  justifi- 
cation as  strong  as  were  ever  presented  in  such  cases,  and  above  all,  that  no  slight  of  the 
authority  of  the  United  States  was  ever  intended;  yet,  it  must  be  admitted,  that  there 
was  in  the  hurried  execution  of  this  necessary  service  a  violation  of  territory,  and  I  am 
instructed  to  assure  you  that  her  Majesty's  Government  consider  this  as  a  most  serious 
fact,  and  that  far  from  thinking  that  an  event  of  this  kind  should  be  lightly  risked,  they 
would  unfeignedly  deprecate  its  reciyrence.  Looking  back  to  what  passed  ai  this  dis- 
tance of  time,  what  is,  perhaps,  most  to  be  regretted,  is,  that  some  explanation  and  apol- 
ogy for  this  occurrence  was  not  immediately  made  ;  this,  with  a  frank  explanation  of 
the  necessity  of  the  case  might,  and  probably  would,  have  prevented  much  of  the  exas- 
peration, and  of  the  subsequent  complaints  and  recriminations  to  which  it  o-ave  rise. 


VI. 

Instructions  to  J\Ir.  Crittenden. 

Department  of  State, 

Washington,  March  15th,  1841. 

Sir:  Alexander  McLeod,  a  Canadian  subject  of  her  Britannic  Majesty,  is  now  impri- 
soned at  Lockport,  in  the  State  of  New  York,  under  an  indictment  for  murder,  alleged 
to  have  Ijeen  committed  l)y  him  in  the  attack  on,  and  destruction  of.  the  steamboat  Caro- 
line, at  Scli]o.s£er,  in  that  State,  on  the  night  of  tbe  3'Jth  of  December,  1S37;  and  his  trial 
is  expected  to  take  place  at  Lockport,  on  the  SSd  insiant. 

You  are  apprised  of  the  correspondence  which  took  place  between  Mr.  Forsythe,  late 
Secretary  of  State,  and  Mr.  Fox,  her  Britannic  Majesty's  minister  here,  on  this  subject, 
in  December  last. 

In  his  note  to  Mr.  Fox,  of  the  2Cth  of  that  month,  Mr.  Forsythe  says:  "If  the  de- 
struction of  the  Caroline  was  a  public  act,  of  persons  in  her  Majesty's  service,  obeying 
the  order  of  their  superior  authorities,  this  fact  has  not  been  before  communicated  to  the 
Government  of  the  United  States,  by  a  person  authorized  to  make  the  admission ;  and 
it  will  he  for  the  court,  which  has  taken  cognizance  of  the  oirence  with  which  Mr. 
McLeod  is  charged,  to  decide  upon  its  validity  when  legally  established  before  it. 

The  President  deems  this  to  be  a  proper  occasion  to  remind  the  Government  of  her 
Britannic  Majesty,  that  the  case  of  the  Caroline  has  been  long  since  brought  to  the  at- 
tention of  her  Majesty's  principal  Secretary  of  State  for  Foreign  Afiliirs,  who,  up  to 
this  day,  has  not  communicated  its  decision  thereupon.  It  is  hoped  that  the  Goverment 
of  her  Majesty  will  perceive  the  importance  of  no  longer  leaving  the  Go\trnment  of  the 
United  States  uninformed  of  its  views  and  intentions,  upon  a  subject  which  has  naturally 
produced  nui.  li  exasperation,  and  which  has  led  to  such  grave  consequences. 

I  have  now  to  inform  you  that  Mr.  Fox  has  addressed  a  note  to  this  department, 
under  date  of  the  IQth  instant,  in  wliich,  under  the  immediate  instruction  and  direction 
of  his  Government,  he  demands,  forniaily  ami  otflcially,  Mr.  McLeod's  release,  on  the 
ground  that  this  transaction,  on  account  of  which  he  lias  been  arrested  and  is  to  be  put 
upon  his  trial  was  of  a  public  character,  planned  and  executed  by  persons  duly  empow- 
ered by  her  Majesty's  colonial  authorities,  to  take  any  steps,  and  to  do  any  acts,  which 
might  be  necessary  tor  the  defence  of  her  Majesty's  territories,  and  for  the' protection  of 
her  Majesty's  subjects:  and  that,  consequetu'y,  tiiose  subjects  of  her  Majesty  who  en- 


81 


gaged  in  that  transaction  were  performing  an  act  of  public  duty,  for  which  th6y  cannot 
be  made  personally  and  individually  answerable  to  the  laws  and  tribunals  of  any  foreign 
country;  and  that  her  Majesty's  Government  has  further  directed  Mr.  Fox  to  make 
known  to  the  United  States,  that  her  Majesty's  Government  entirely  approved  of  the 
course  pursued  by  Mr.  Fox,  and  the  language  adopted  by  him  in  the  correspondence 
above  mentioned. 

There  is,  therefore,  now  an  authentic  declaration  on  the  part  of  the  British  Govern- 
ment, that  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  was  an  act  of  public  force,  done  by  military  men, 
under  the  orders  of  their  superiors,  and  is  recognised  as  such  by  the  Queen's  Govern- 
ment. The  importance  of  this  declaration  is  not  to  be  doubted,  and  the  President  is  of 
opinion  that  it  calls  upon  him  for  the  performance  of  a  high  duly.  That  an  individual 
forming  part  of  a  public  force,  and  acting  under  the  authority  of  his  Government,  is  not 
to  be  held  answerable  as  a  private  trespasser  or  malefactor,  is  a  principle  of  public 
law,  sanctioned  by  the  usages  of  all  civilized  nations,  and  which  the  Government  of  the 
United  States  has  no  inclination  to  dispute.  This  has  no  connexion  whatever  with  the 
question,  whether,  in  this  case,  this  attack  on  the  Caroline  was,  as  the  British  Govern- 
ment thinks  it,  a  justifiable  employment  of  force,  for  the  purpose  of  defending  the  British 
territory  from  an  unprovoked  attack,  or  whether  it  was  a  most  unjustifiable  invasion,  in 
time  of  peace,  of  the  territory  of  the  United  States,  as  this  Government  has  regarded  it. 
The  two  questions  are  essentially  difl'erent,  and,  while  acknowledging  that  an  individual 
may  claim  immunity  from  the  consequences  of  acts  done  by  him,  by  showing  that  he 
acted  under  national  authority,  this  Government  is  not  to  be  understood  as  changins:  the 
opinions  which  it  has  heretofore  expressed  in  regard  to  the  real  nature  of  the  transac- 
tion which  resulted  in  the  destruction  of  the  Caroline.  That  subject  it  is  not  necessary 
for  any  purpose  connected  with  this  comnuinication  to  discuss.  The  views  of  this  Go- 
vernment in  relation  to  it  are  known  to  that  of  England  ;  and  we  are  expecting  the  an- 
swer of  that  Government  to  the  communi:ation  which  has  been  made  to  it. 

All  tint  is  intended  to  be  said  at  present  i»,  that  since  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  is 
avowed  as  a  national  act  which  may  Justify  reprisals,  or  even  general  war,  if  the  Go\-ern- 
ment  of  the  United  States,  in  the  judgment  which  it  shall  form  of  the  transaction  and  of 
its  ov.-n  duty,  should  see  fit  so  to  decide,  yet  that  it  raises  a  question  entirely  public  and 
political — a  question  between  independent  nations — and  that  individuals  connected  in  it 
cannot  be  arrested  and  tried  before  the  ordinary  tribunals,  as  for  the  violation  of  muni- 
cipal law.  If  the  attack  on  the  Caroline  was  unjustifiable,  as  this  Government  has  as- 
serted, the  la.-  which  has  been  violated  is  the  law  of  nations;  and  the  redress  which  is 
to  be  sought_is  the  redress  authorized,  in  such  cases,  by  the  provisions  of  that  code. 

You  are  well  aware  that  the  President  has  no  power  to  arrest  the  proceeding  in  the 
tivil  and  criminal  courts  of  the  State  of  New  York.  If  this  indictment  were  pending  in 
one  of  the  courts  of  the  United  States,  I  <.m  directed  to  say  that  the  President,  upon  the 
receipt  of  Mr.  Fox's  last  communication,  would  have  immediately  directed  a  nolle  pro- 
sequi to  be  entered. 

Whether  in  thi."?  case  the  Governor  of  New  York  have  that  power,  or,  if  he  have, 
vhethcr  he  would  fee!  it  his  duty  to  exercise  it,  are  points  upon  which  we  are  not  in- 
formed. 

It  is  understood  that  Mr.  McLeod  is  liolden  also  on  civil  p.rocess,  sued  out  against 
him  by  the  owner  of  the  Caroline.  We  suppose  it  very  clear  that  the  Executive  of  the 
State  cannot  interfere  with  such  process;  and,  indeed,  if  such  process  were  pending  in 
the  courts  of  the  United  States,  the  President  could  not  arrest  it,     In  such,  and  many 


82 

analogous- case,  the  party  prosecuted,  or  sued,  must  avail  himself  of  his  exemption  or 
defence,  by  judical  proceedings,  either  into  the  court  into  which  lie  is  called  or  in  some 
other  court.  But  whether  the  process  be  criminal  or  civil,  the  fact  of  having  acted  under 
public  authority,  and  in  obedience  .0  tlie  orders  of  lawful  superiors,  must  be  regarded  as 
a  vaha  defence;  otherwise,  individuals  would  beliolden  responsible  for  injuries  resulting 
from  the  acts  of  Government,  and  even  from  the  operations  of  public  wai-  ^ 


VII. 

M:  Wheaton  to  Mr.  Webster. 

Berlin,  Mvember  15,  1842. 
Sir:  Your  despatch  No.  36,  enclosing  copy  of  the  treaty  recently  concluded  at  Wash- 
mgton,  between  the  United  States  and  Great  Britain,  has  just  reached  me.     I  be-  leave 
to  congratulate  you,  sir,  on  the  happy  termination  of  this  arduous  negotiation,  in  which 
Uie  rights,  honor,  and  interests  of  our  country  have  been  so  successfully  maintained. 
The  arrangement  it  contains  on  the  subject  of  the  African  slave  trade  is  particularly  ^atis- 
factory,  as  adapted  to  secure  the  end  proposed  by  the  only  means  consistent  with  our 
maritime  rights.    This  arrangement  has  decided  the  course  of  the  French  Government 
m  respect  to  this  matter.     Its  ambassador  in  London  notified  to  the  conference  of  the  five 
great  powers  the  final  determination  of  France  not  to  ratify  the  treaty  of  December   1841 
and,  at  the  same  time,  expressed  her  disposition  to  fulfil  the  stipulations  of  the  separate 
treaties  of  1831  and  1834,  between  her  and  Great  Britain.    The  treaty  of  1841    there- 
fore, now  subsists  only  between  four  of  the  great  powers  by  whom  it  was  originally  con- 
eluded;  and  as  tliree  of  these  (Austria,  Prussia,  and  Russia)  are  very  little  concerned  in- 
the  navigation  of  the  ocean  and  the  tn  Je  in  the  African  seas,  and  have,  besides,  taken 
precautions  in  the  treaty  itself  to  secure  their  commerce  from  interruption  by  the  exer- 
cise of  the  right  of  search  in  other  jiarts,  this  compact  may  now  be  considered  as  almost 
a  dead  letter. 

Th.  policy  of  the  United  States  may  consequently  be  said,  on  this  occasion,  perhaps 
for  the  first  time,  to  have  had  a  most  decisive  influence  on  that  of  Europe.  This  will 
probably  more  frequently  occur  hereafter;  and  it  should  be  an  encouragement  to  us  to 
cultivate  our  maritime  resources,  and  to  strengtjicn  our  naval  arm,  by  which  alone  we 
are  known  and  felt  among  the  nation.^  of  the  earth. 


VIII. 

Washlngtoji  Trett/j/.— [Extract.] 
Article  Vlil.-Thc  parties  mutually  stipulate  that  each  shall  prepare,  equip,  and 
mamtain  in  service,  on  the  coast  of  Africa,  a  sufficient  and  adequate  squadron,  or  naval 
force  of  vessels,  of  suitable  numbers  and  descriptions,  to  carry  in  all  not  less  than  eighty 
guns,  to  enforce,  separately  and  respectively,  the  laws,  rights,  a-id  obligations  of  each  of 
the  two  countries,  for  the  suppression  of  the  slave  trade;  the  said  squadrons  to  be  inde- 
pendent of  each  other,  but  the  two  Governments  stipulating  nevertlieless  to  give  such  orders 
to  tlie  officers  commanding  their  respective  forces  as  shall  enable  them  most  effectually  to 
act  m  concert  and  co-operation,  upon  mutual  con.sultaiion,  a.s  exigencies  may  arise,  for 


I 


83 

the  attainment  of  the  true  object  of  this  article;  copies  of  all  such  orders  to  be  communis 
cated  by  each  Government  to  the  other  respectively.  " 

Article  IX.  Whereas,  notwithstanding  all  efforts  which  may  b.  made  on  the  coast 
of  Africa  for  suppressmg  tJie  slave  trade,  the  facilities  for  carrvinff  on  that  r™ffl  !, 
avoiding  the  vigilance  of  cruisers  by  the  fraudulent  use  of  Cafd  t  eT^at  Z. 
so  great,  and  the  temptations  for  pursuing  it.  while  a  market  Z  'be  found  for  s  av";  s" 
ZT  T  *^'f '^•^•^  '-^-'^  ^^^y  ^^  '-g  'delayed,  unless  all  markets  be  shu  S-^ 
U^^e  purchase  of  African  negroes,  the  parties  to  this  treaty  agree  that  they  will  uS  in 
all  becoming  representations  and  remonstrances,  with  any  and  all  Powers  within  who  e 
dominions  such  markets  are  allowed  to  exist ;  and  that  they  will  urge  upon  all  such  Pow- 
ers the  propriety  and  duty  of  closing  such  markets  effectually,  at  once  and  forever 


Convention  belu-ecn  Her  JiJajesty  and  the  Kh^  of  the  French  for  the  suppression  of  the  traffic 

in  s/«v«.— [ExTR.^cT.] 
Article  I.-In  order  that  the  flags  nf  Her  Majesty  the  Queen  of  the  United  Kin- 
dom  of  Great  Britain  and  Ireland,  and  of  His  Majesty  the  King  of  the  Fre.::h.  may  no" 
contrary  to  the  law  of  nations  and  the  hnvs  in  force  in  the  two  countries,  be  usaJd  tj 

trffiln-  ll'-         ',"'1'""'"'"^""'^'°^^^"  ""^^  ^'^-'-^  suppression  of  that 
tnffic.  His  Majesty  the  King  of  the  French  engages,  as  soon  as  ..y  be  practicable   ta 
station  on  the  West  Coast  of  Africa,  from  Cape  Verd  to  16°  .30'  .south  latitude,  a  naval 
force  of  at  least  twenty-six  cruizers,  consisting  of  sailing  and  steam-ves.-els;  and  Her 
Majesty  the  Queen   of  the  United  Kingdom  of  Great  Britam  and  Ireland  engages  as 
soon  as  ,n.y  ,e  practicable,  to  station  on  the  same  part  of  the  West  Coast  of  AfSa  a 
nava  force  of  no   less  than  twenty-six  cruizers,  consisting  of  sailing  vessels  and  steam! 
vessels  ;  and  on  the  East  Coast  of  Africa  such  number  of  cruizers  af  Her  Majesty  Zl 
judge  sufficient  for  the  prevention  of  the  trade  on  that  coast :  which  cruizers  sh^l  be  em" 
ployed  for  the  pv,rpose.s  above  mentioned,  in  conformity  with  the  following  stipulations. 
Article  II -The  said  British  and   French  naval  forces  shall  act  in  concert  for  the 
suppression  of  the  slave  trade.     It  will  be  their  duty  to  watch  strictly  every  part  of  the 

Ztt'V     /■''"  "'""  '"  """^  '''''''''  ^"  ^^''^'^  I'  -^-'  ^he  slave  trade  is 
ar  ed  on.  For  this  purpose  they  shall  exercise  fully  and  completely  all  the  powers  vested 

m  the  crowns  of  Great  Britain  and  France  for  the  suppression  of  the  slave  trade  sub- 
ject only  to  the  modifications  hereinafter  mentioned  as  to  British  and  French  ships' 

Grtrrr  ";?',  °'^""  ''''"■  ^■^'-^y'^-  ^--^-  •  the  Uimed  Kingdom  of 
Great  Brita-n  and  Ireland,  and  of  His  Majesty  the  King  of  the  French,  having  respec 
tively  the  command  of  the  squadrons  :  ;  Great  Britain  and  ^rance,  to  be  emlyed  i.r 
carrying  out  this  Convention,  shall  concert  togc  her  as  to  the  best  means  of  watching-  . 
strictly  the  parts  of  the  African  coast  before  described,  by  .  cting  and  defining  the  s"^ 
tions,  and  committing  the  care  thereof  to  Engli.sh  a  .;  .  .  nch  cruizers,  jointly  or  sepa- 
ately,  as  may  be  deemed  most  expedient ;  provide  ..  ...ys,  that  in  cas  of  a  .Lion  be- 
mg  specially  commits  to  the  charge  ot  cruizers  of  ..ther  nation,  the  cruizers  of  the 
o^e  nation  may  at  any  tune  enter  the  same  for  the  purpose  of  exercising  the  rights  re. 
spectiveiy  belongmg  to  them  for  the  suppression  of  vi  ■  -:;ave  trade.         ^  ^       '" 


84 


IX. 

JWr.  Webster  to  Lord  Mihurton. 

Department  of  State, 

Jf'ashliigton,  August  8,  1842. 
My  Lord:  We  have  had  several  conversations  on  the  subject  of  impressment,  but  T 
•do  not  understand  that  your  lordship  has  instructions  from  your  Government  to  nego- 
tiate upon  ,t,  nor  does  the  Government  of  tl>e  United  States  see  any  utility  in  onenhi- 
such  negotmuon,  unless  the  British  Government  is  prepared  to  renounce  iL  practice  in 
all  future  wars. 

No  cause  has  produced,  to  so  great  an  extent,  and  for  so  long  a  period,  disturbing  and 
irritating  influence  on  the  political  relations  of  the  United  States  and  England,**  the  im- 
pressment of  seamen  by  British  cruisers  from  American  merchant  vessels 

From  the  commencement  of  the  French  revolution  to  the  breaking  out  of  the  war  be- 
tween the  two  countries  in  1812,  hardly  a  year  elapsed  without  loud  complaint  and  ear- 
nest remonstrance.  A  deep  feeling  of  opposition  to  the  right  claimed,  and  to  the  practice 
exercised  under  it,  and  not  unfrequently  exercised  without  the  least  regard  to  what  jus- 
li;:'  "T;"  Tk  "  '""  '''''''''  "'"^ ''  ^'"  '■'='>'  "-'f  l-'i  be^n  admitted,  t  ok 
mos  powerfully  with  otiier  causes  to  produce  the  state  of  hostilities  which  ensued, 
tween  it?      r"      '  ''^"^  '"'^  '''''  "'^  ''""'^  negotiations  have  taken  place  be- 

r  Jin  s'\        ""'""'"  T^''  '"  '"'"  "'  '^"'^"-^  ^""^^  '--«  °f  ^"-^i"?  t'-- 
anZe     do;    rT  '""'     '  '"'""''  ''^'''""  °^' '^"  P-ctice  has  been  requested 

limitation  of  it.,  exercise,  and  some  security  against  its  enormous  abuses. 

standsTZ  VT  '"'"'''  '"^^  *='°'-^^'  ''^'y ''■''■'  ••^»  ^-l'^'^-     The  question 

s  ands  at  this  moment  where  it  stood  fifty  yeirs  ago.  The  nearest  approach  to  a  settle- 
n.n  was  a  con^xntion  proposed  in  1S03,  and  which  had  come  to  H.e  point  o    s "n    ur 

:  :i2^'::f  ^'\-"-^-"-  «^  ^^«  British  Government  insLmg  thatlh:  :  1 
>o,«  5.05  should  be  expressly  excepted  out  of  the  spiieie  over  which  the  cnntemnhted 

;  S  r;"  ''''"''  ""^^^^^'"^"^  ^"-'"^  --"^-  ^iie  Amencan  minist;  M  S  re- 
fh  n  to  "^"^""V"  ^"'^  '-'^"--ble,  and  chose  rather  to  abandon  he  ne^otil  ion 
than  to  acquiesce  in  the  doctrine  which  it  proposed  to  establish 

England  asserts  the  right  of  impressing  British  subjects,  in  time  of  war,  out  of  neutral 
Zt::::'t'  -"^-^^7^7  'y  '-  --^  «^-s,  who,  among  the"cr:::^;t  h 

at  o  th;:  '  '"  f  '""^""  ®''^  '""'•'^  ""^  "^  '  '•--'  ^-«-i-  of  the  prero- 
.  atue  of  he  crown ;  which  prerogative  is  alleged  to  be  founded  on  the  English  law  of 

he  p  rpetual  and  in  .soluble  alleg.anc.  of  the  ..ubject,  and  his  obligation,  ut^der  1  cir- 
cumstances, and  for  his  whole  life,  to  render  nnlKary  .ervice  to  the^crow.',  whelt Z 

partic.    Iinprcssiacnt  of  seamen,  out  of  ar.i  beyond  English  territory,  and  from 


85 


on  board  the  ships  of  other  nations,  is  an  interference  with  the  rights  of  other  nations; 
is  further,  thcreiorc,  than  Engiisli  prerogative  can  legally  extend  ;  and  is  nothing- 
bul  an  attempt  to  mforce  the  peculiar  law  of  England  beyond  the  dominions  and 
jurisdiction  of  the  crown.  The  claim  asserts  an  extra-territorial  authority  for  the 
law  of  British  prerogative,  and  assumes  to  exercise  this  extra-territorial  authority 
to  the  manifest  injury  and  annoyance  of  the  citizens  and  subjects  of  other  States,  on 
board  their  own  vessels  on  the  high  seas. 

Every  merchant  vessel  on  the  seas  is  rightfully  considered  as  part  of  the  territory  of 
the  country  to  which  it  belongs.  Tlie  entry,  therefore,  into  such  vessel,  being  neutral, 
by  a  belligerant,  is  an  act  of  force,  and  is,  priina  facie,  a  wrong,  a  trespass,  which  can 
be  justified  only  when  done  for  some  purpose,  allowed  to  form  a  sufficient  justification 
by  the  law  of  nations.  But  a  British  cruiser  enters  an  American  merchant  vessel  in  or- 
der to  take  therefrom  supposed  British  subjects;  otTering  no  justification  therefor,  under 
the  law  of  nations,  but  claiming  the  right  under  the  law  of  England  respecting  the  King's 
prerogative.  This  cannot  be  defended.  English  soil,  English  territory,  English  juris- 
diction, is  the  appropriate  siihere  for  the  operation  of  English  law.  The  ocean  is  the 
sphere  of  the  law  of  nations;  and  any  merchant  vessel  on  the  seas  is,  by  that  law,  un- 
der the  protection  of  the  laws  of  her  own  nation,  and  may  claim  immunity,  unless  in 
cases  in  v-hich  that  law  allows  her  to  be  entered  or  visited. 

If  this  notion  of  perpetual  allegiance,  and  the  conisequent  power  of  the  prerogative, 
was  the  law  of  the  world ;  if  it  formed  part  of  the  conventional  code  of  nations,  and 
was  usually  practised  like  the  right  of  visiting  neutral  ships,  for  the  purpose  of  discover- 
ing and  seizing  enemy  property,  then  irnpres.^ment  might  be  defended  as  a  common 
right,  and  there  would  be  no  remedy  for  the  evil  till  the  national  code  should  be  altered. 
But  this  is  by  no  means  the  case.  There  is  no  such  principle  incorporated  into  the  code 
of  nations.  The  doctrine  stands  only  as  English  law — not  as  national  law ;  and  English 
law  can  not  be  of  force  beyond  English  dominion.  Whatever  duties  or  relations  that 
lav/  creates  betv/een  the  sovereign  and  his  subjects,  can  be  enforced  and  maintained  only 
within  the  realm,  or  proper  possessions  or  territory  of  the  sovereign.  There  may  be 
quite  as  just  a  prerogative  right  to  the  property  of  subjects  as  to  their  personal  services, 
in  an  exigency  of  the  State;  but  no  Government  thinks  of  controlling  by  its  own  laws 
property  of  its  subjects  situated  abroad;  much  less  does  any  Government  think  of  en- 
tering the  territory  of  another  pov/er  for  the  purpose  of  seizing  such  prq^erty  and  apply- 
ing it  to  its  own  uses.  As  laws,  the  prerogatives  of  the  crown  of  England  have  no  obli- 
gation on  persons  or  property  domiciled  or  situated  abroad. 

"When,  thereibre,"  says  an  authority  not  unknown  or  unregarded  on  either  side  of 
the  Atlantic,  "we  speak  of  the  right  of  a  State  to  bind  its  own  native  subjects  every 
where,  we  speak  only  of  its  own  claim  and  exercise  of  sovereignty  over  them,  when 
they  return  within  its  own  territorial  jurisdiction,  and  not  of  its  right  to  compel  or  re- 
quire obedience  to  such  laws,  on  the  part  of  other  nation.-?,  within  their  own  territorial 
sovereignty.  Gu  the  contrary,  every  nation  has  an  exclusive  right  to  regulate  persons 
and  things  within  its  own  territory,  according  to  its  sovereign  will  and  public  polity." 

The  good  sense  of  these  principles,  their  remark-'.ijle  pertinency  to  the  subject  now 
under  consideration,  and  the  extraordinary  consequences  resulting  from  the  British  doc- 
trine, are  signally  iiiauitbhted  by  tliat  which  we  see  taking  place  every  day.  England 
acknowledges  herself  oier-burdened  with  population  of  the  poorer  classes.  Every  in- 
stance of  the  emieraiion  uf  persons  of  those  classes  is  regarded  by  her  as  a  benetit.  Eng- 
land, tlierelV're,  encourages  emisration  ;  means  are  notoriously  supplied  to  emigrants  'O' 


ml^m 


■I 


86 

assist  their  conveyance,  from  public  funds  ;  and  the  n«w  w,rlH  i 
*hese  United  States,  receive  the  man yr  thousand.  nA  "^'V^'^^''^' '^"^  ""^^t  especially 
bosom  of  their  native  ,and  by  the  n::^:'::^^;  ,^di:::^r  ^l  ^^ ^"^'  'T  ''' 
poverty  and  distress,  in  over-crowded  cities  to  seek  .1  >  ^i^ey  com.  a^vay  from 
homes,  in  a  country  of  free  instuutions'  p  S^d  by  a  k  dtdr'  "Y"'  T'  "^" 
anguage,  and  hanng  laws  and  u.ages  in  nmay  resp'cts  ke  ;o;e%''"r 'I'  '^''T 
been  accustomed  ;  and  a  country  wh.ch,  upon  L  X      i    foun  i  ''^  '"'' 

tions  for  persons  of  their  rha-irtp.  nnH         r  ■       T      '  "^  '^  P^"^'""  "^^'"'^  '^"^ac. 

•lUs  stated  that,  in  the^u    ^  ^    ;  ;^^^^^^^^^^^  ^n  the  t.ce  of  the  globe. 

thousand  emigrants  left  the  sm-^le  ^0^0^'  ?!^         '  ''^''  ''"""'  ''^^"  '^en-ysix 

five  times  as  many  a    left  h  '  s!l        f     uT"^  '''  '^'  ^"''"^  ^""'"'^ '-'"»  ^-^^  - 

and  all  other  paZ^ti^:;  n/Ts:::^:;  i^^-^-^^ '- '''  ''^"^^  -•-- 

ties  in  circumstances  of  great  'destitution  -1^!,       ,     ^  ^^°  '      '  "'  '"^  "'"^'^'^  '"  ""'  °'- 
and  private,  ar.  severely  tavLtl  .  "  '''  "'   ^''^  '^^""^'■>''  '^^'^'^  P'^'^'i<= 

-ith  the  ne^  comln  tv  i    which  t        7     T'"  """'^'"'^  ""'^■^-     ^"  '^^  '^-^  mingle 

find empioynjzr  iX:^'  z.'::?  ^t'T' ^"' ^^«^---  °^'-4 '  -- 

from  the  forest  a-id  a  c^rea^r  o  u       .  ^°''''''''"'  <='^l'^vated  lands  reclaimed 

Now,  my  lord,  if  war  should  breaV  out  be IvTe     E^rnd     ral'L  "'"'^'- 
can  any  thing  be  more  uniu^t  inv  fi.;.,  •  ^^--'^n"  and  a  Earopem  power, 

of  mankind,  than  thrZhisho'T'"  T'^''''''  ''  ^^«  ?-'-al  sentiments 
and  compell  d  by  Zl^^^^^^  "f  "',  ""  P"^'"^'  '^'^^  ^"^"^""^-^^  '^>^  '^-. 

'Heirne^empio  men;  ;;;::^;;  L'^:::^^:r-^';r--v^^^''!^'"--^'^- 

and  force  them  to  under-o  tU.  .i.  reia.ons,  anl  thoir  doma.tic  connexions, 

which  „.  .K,„  :r;r .  tr:„"i'::  t''s;;:;'''"'':"'-'-  *■"  -  '""-"^ 

en  be  b„,  „„  »„,„„  ,„  „,j,  ,,-  "  7'"'^^;^  f «»'"'?.  «"«'":y,  my  lo.d,  Hero 
should  »hcr  proven.  .„c,,  eml,!.  Tn.e  ,  ,  ,  "  '"»-  ™.>.le  ,h,.  E„.*„a 
■note  ii,  she  should  leave  (P„„  „„,  , '  ,  T'  '  "  ""'•  "  ''"  '"''«»"■?'  «"<1  pro- 
"IHiance,  Imt  tole",  '   ™,  "«  "»'«^taen.  of  „  do:,i,i,  .„J  ^  conT.d.c  „,y 

uponlheJs  t:if  r     '    1'  "'T  """""'  ""  P»i")'»f  England  annually  c»„ 

a'd  by  ,he  hupp'  ,^^^1^:^:!:^'^.  ™™.?r"'""™'  -f .  '■""^■""""'• 
i:;;::;er;i;',:-^rr"rrT='"^^^^-'^'^^ 

of  such  pe^sons,  and  renounce  all  control  over  their  conduct  > 

Jin  "CrT  '??"' '''.''''''"'""  "  '^  "^'^'^  -''^'^^  -"^^-     '^  ''  -''"i  be  iusti- 
that    „  I?  '•  T  ''"'  '''^  '^''^'''^  "^  ^«  '^^  ^-^'y  «'^'i-^'^>  «till  renuin   tru» 

^^"  m  m  S -r  •"I  "  '"'^  "^'  "'^■"^-     '^'^  ^'"'^^^'^"'y  "'•  ''-  Sta;;  is 

<."tl^e'     Vv      t     T         '    ""'-'""^ 
■        seas,  tx.pt  s.  for  as  tne  law  of  r.ations  ju.t.n^s  .ntru.ion  upon  that  p  ,ssessi,,« 


rlt 


87 


:y 


for  special  purposes ;  and  all  experience  has  shown  that  no  member  of  a  crew,  wherever 
born,  is  safe  against  impressment  wlien  a  ship  is  visited. 

The  evils  and  injuries  resulting  from  the  actual  practice  can  hardly  be  overstated,  and 
have  ever  proved  themselves  to  be  such  as  should  lead  to  its  relinquishment,  even  if  it 
were  founded  in  any  defensible  principle.  The  difficulty  of  discriminating  between  Eng- 
lish subjects  and  American  citizens  has  always  been  found  to  be  great,  even  when  an  hon- 
est purpose  of  discrimination  has  existed.  But  the  lieutenant  of  a  man-of-war,  having 
necessity  for  men,  is  apt  to  be  a  summary  jud2;e,  and  his  decisions  will  be  quite  as  sig- 
nificant  of  his  own  wants  and  his  own  power  as  of  the  truth  and  justice  of  the  case.  An 
extract  from  a  letter  of  Mr.  King,  of  the  13th  of  April,  1797,  to  the  American  Secretary 
of  State,  shows  something  of  the  enormous  extent  of  these  wrongful  seizures : 

"Instead  of  a  few,  and  these  in  many  instances  equivocal  cases,  I  have,"  says  he, 
"  since  the  month  of  July  past,  made  application  for  the  discharge,  from  British  men-of- 
war,  of  two  hundred  and  seventy-one  seamen,  who,  stating  themselves  to  be  Americans, 
have  claimed  my  interference.  Of  this  number  eighty-six  have  been  ordered  by  the 
Admiralty  to  be  discharged,  thirty-seven  more  have  been  detained  as  British  subjects  or 
as  American  volunteers,  or  for  want  of  proof  that  they  are  Americans,  and  to  my  appli- 
cations for  the  discharge  of  the  remaining  one  hundred  and  forty-eight,  I  have  received 
no  answer— the  ships  on  board  of  which  these  seamen  were  detained  having,  in  many 
instances,  sailed  before  an  examination  was  made  in  consequence  of  my  application. 

"  It  is  cerUiin  that  some  of  those  who  have  applied  to  me  are  not  American  citizens, 
but  the  exceptions  are  in  my  opinion  few,  and  the  evidence,  exclusive  of  certificates,  has 
been  such  as,  in  most  cases,  to  satisfy  me  that  the  applicants  were  real  Americans,  who 
have  been  forced  into  the  British  service,  and  who,  with  singular  constancy,  have  gene- 
rally persevered  in  refusing  pay  or  bounty,  though  in  some  instances  they  have  been  in 
service  more  than  two  years." 

But  the  injuries  of  impressment  are  by  no  means  confined  to  its  immediate  subjects 
or  the  individuals  on  whom  it  is  practised.  Vessels  suffer  from  the  weakening  of  their 
crews,  and  voyages  are  often  delayed,  and  not  unfrequently  broken  up,  by  subtraction 
from  tlie  number  of  necessary  hands  by  impressment.  And  what  is  still  of  greater 
and  more  general  moment,  the  fear  of  impressment  has  been  found  to  crrate  great  diffi- 
culty in  obtaining  sailors  for  the  American  merchant  service  in  times  of  European  war. 
Seafaring  men,  otherwise  inclined  to  enter  into  th;\t  service,  are,  as  experience  has 
shown,  deterred  by  the  fear  of  finding  themselves  ere  long  in  compulsory  military  ser- 
vice in  British  ships  of  war.  Many  instances  have  occurred,  fully  established  in  proof, 
hi  which  raw  seamen,  natives  of  the  United  States,  fresh  from  the  fields  of  agriculture, 
entering  for  the  first  time  on  shipboard,  have  been  impressed  before  they  made  the  land, 
placed  on  the  decks  of  British  nten-of-war,  and  compelled  to  serve  for  years  before  they 
could  obtain  their  release,  or  rf  visit  their  country  or  their  homes.  Such  instances  be- 
come known,  and  their  effect  in  discouraging  young  men  in  engaging  in  the  merchant 
service  of  their  country  can  neither  be  doubted  nor  wondered  at.  More  than  all,  my 
lord,  the  practice  of  imprcssmeni,  whenever  it  has  existed,  has  produced  not  coiicdia- 
tion  and  good  feeling,  but  resentment,  exasperation,  and  animosity,  between  the  two 
great  commercial  countries  of  the  world. 

In  the  calm  and  quiel  which  succeeded  the  late  war— a  condition  so  favorable  for  dis- 
passionate consideration- England  herself  has  evidently  seen  the  harshness  of  impress- 
ment, even  when  exercised  on  seamen  in  her  own  merchant  service,  and  --he  Iv-u  adopt- 
ed measures  calculated,  if  not  to  renounce  the  power  or  to  abolish  the  practice,  at  least 


/  *. 


to  supersede  its  necessity  by  other  means  of  manning  the  royal  navy,  more  compatible 
witli  justice  and  the  rights  of  individuals,  and  far  more  conformable  to  the  spirit  and  sen- 
timents of  the  age. 

Under  these  circumstances,  the  Government  of  the  United  States  has  used  the  occa- 
eion  of  your  lordship's  pacific  mission  to  review  this  whole  subject,  and  to  bring  it  to 
your  notice  and  that  of  your  Government.  It  has  reflected  on  the  past,  pondered  the 
condition  of  the  present,  and  endeavored  to  anticipate,  so  far  as  might  be  in  its  power, 
the  probable  future;  and  I  am  now  to  communicate  to  your  lordship  the  result  of  these 
deliberations. 

The  American  Government,  then,  ia  prepared  to  say  that  the  practice  of  impressing 
seamen  fron\  American  vessels  cannot  hereafter  be  allowed  to  take  place.  That  practice 
is  founded  on  principles  which  it  does  not  recognise,  and  is  invariably  attended  by  con- 
sequences so  unjust,  so  injurious,  and  of  such  formidable  magnitude,  as  cannot  be  sub- 
mitted  to. 

In  the  early  disputes  between  the  two  Governments  on  this  so  long-contested  topic,. 
the  distinguished  person  to  whose  hands  were  first  intrusted  the  seals  of  this  Depart-' 
ment  declared,  that  "  the  simplest  rule  will  be,  that  the  vessel,  being  American,  shall  be 
evidence  that  the  seamen  on  board  are  such." 

Fifty  years'  experience,  the  utter  failure'of  many  negotiations,  and  a  careful  reconsid- 
eration now  had  of  the  whole  subject,  at  a  moment  when  the  pa,ssion3  are  laid,  and  no 
present  interest  or  emergency  exists  to  bias  the  judgment,  have  fully  convinced  this  Gov- 
ernment that  this  ia  not  only  the  simplest  and  best,  but  the  only  rule  which  can  be 
adopted  and  observed,  consistently  with  the  rights  and  honor  of  the  United  States,  and 
the  security  of  their  citizens.  That  role  announces,  therbfore,  what  will  here- 
after BE  THE  PRINCIPLE  MAINTAINED  BT  THEIR  GOVERNMENT.  In  EVER?  REGULABLT 
D0CU.MENTED  AMERICAN  MERCHANT  VESSEL  THE  CREW  WHO  NAVIGATE  IT  WILL  FIND 
THEIR  PROTECTION  IN  THE  FLAO  WHICH  IS  OVER  THEM. 

This  announcement  is  not  made,  my , lord,  to  revive  useless  recollections  of  the  past^ 
nor  to  stir  the  embers  from  fires  which  have  been,  in  a  great  degree,  smothered  by 
many  years  of  peace.  Far  otherwise.  Its  purpose  is  to  extinguish  Uiose  fires  effoctu- 
ally  before  new  incidents  arise  to  fan  them  into  flame.  The  communication  is  in  the 
spirit  of  peace,  and  for  the  sake  of  peace  ;  and  springs  from  a  deep  and  conscientious 
conviction,  that  high  interests  of  both  nations  require  that  this  so  long-contested  and 
controverted  subject  should  now  be  finally  put  to  rest.  I  persuade  myself,  my  lord, 
that  you  will  do  justice  to  this  frank  and  sincere  avowal  of  motives  ;  and  that  you  will 
communicate  your  sentiments,  in  this  respect,  to  your  Government. 

This  letter  closes,  my  lord,  on  my  part,  our  ofiicial  correspondence ;  md  I  gladly  use 
Ihe  occasion  to  offer  to  you  the  assurance  of  my  high  and  sincere  regard. 

Lord  AsHBUKTON,  ^c.  ^c,  ^c.  ''^'''^^  WEBSTER. 


fev' 


